The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No.148 of 2022 ----- Kumar Pankaj Anand .......... Petitioner. -Versus- 1. State of Jharkhand 2. S.L. Hari Kumar, Registrar, Central University of Jharkhand, Mandar, Ranchi. 3. Kshiti Bhusan, Vice Chancellor-cum-Chairman, Executive Council, Central University of Jharkhand, Mandar, Ranchi. 4. Prof. H.P. Singh, Member, Executive Council, Central University of Jharkhand, Mandar, Ranchi. 5. Prof. Sanjay Singh, Member, Executive Council, Central University of Jharkhand, Mandar, Ranchi. 6. Prof. Shri Prakash Mani Tripathi, Member, Executive Council, Central University of Jharkhand, Mandar, Ranchi. 7. Dr. Punam Singh, Member, Executive Council, Central University of Jharkhand, Mandar, Ranchi. 8. Prof. Narendra Kumar Singh, Member, Executive Council, Central University of Jharkhand, Mandar, Ranchi. 9. Prof. Kamini Kumar, Member, Executive Council, Central University of Jharkhand, Mandar, Ranchi. 10. Prof. Shambhu Nath Singh, Member, Executive Council, Central University of Jharkhand, Mandar, Ranchi. .......... Opp. Parties. -----
Legal Reasoning
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhishek Singh, Advocate For the State For O.P. Nos.2 & 3 : Mr. Manoj Tandon, Advocate : Mr. Anshuman Kr., AC to SC(L& C)II ----- Order No.13 Date: 17.05.2024 1. The present contempt case has been filed for initiating contempt proceeding against the opposite parties for their wilful and deliberate violation of the order dated 21st December, 2021 passed in W.P.(S) No.1532 of 2020. 2. Reference may be made to the order dated 12th April, 2024, which reads as under:- “Mr. Manoj Tandon, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party nos. 2 and 3, refers to paragraph-4 of the supplementary show cause affidavit dated 08.04.2024 filed on behalf of the said opposite parties, which reads as under: “4. That pursuant to such direction, the answering opposite parties have paid a total sum of Rs.39,35,246.00 after making necessary deductions as summarized below: Heading Amount (in Rs.) Gross Amount paid NPS Employer’s contribution (remitted to NPA account) 65,69,300.00 8,18,205.00 Total sanctioned amount 73,87,505.00 Deductions Employer’s contribution 5,84,432.00 under NPS (remitted to NPS account) Income Tax + Cess on IT 20,49,622.00 (30% + 4%) respectively Net Amount Paid 39,35,246.00 Copies of the receipts of payment have been annexed as Annexure-E series to the said supplementary show cause affidavit.” 2. It is thus submitted that the entire admissible amount in terms with order dated 21.12.2021 passed in W.P.(S) No. 1532 of 2020 has been paid to the petitioner. 3. As against this, Mr. P.A.S. Pati, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner has not been paid total admissible amount. It would be evident from the chart annexed at page-10 of the show cause affidavit dated 01.02.2024 filed on behalf of the opposite party nos. 2 and 3 (part of the requisition made by the Central University, Jharkhand to UGC) that Rs.71,48,742/- was requisitioned under the ‘Salary Head’ Rs.2,00,000/- for medical reimbursement’ and Rs.17,00,000 (approx.) for salary during suspension period. In total, the Central University of Jharkhand sought fund of Rs.90,48,742.00 (approx.) from the UGC for payment of admissible dues to the petitioner. However, as per paragraph-4 of the supplementary show cause affidavit dated 08.04.2024 filed on behalf of the opposite party nos. 2 and 3, Rs.73,87,505.00, in total, has been sanctioned in favour of the petitioner and after necessary deduction, an amount of Rs.39,35,246.00 has been paid to him. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the show cause affidavit dated 01.02.2024 as well as supplementary show cause affidavit dated 08.04.2024 filed on behalf of the opposite party nos. 2 and 3, the said opposite parties are directed to verify as to whether the petitioner has been paid medical reimbursement of Rs.2,00,000/- as well as salary during the suspension period i.e., Rs. 17,00,000/-. If it is found that the petitioner has not been paid the same, the said opposite parties shall pay the said amount to the petitioner and to file a compliance affidavit to that effect within three weeks. 5. 10.05.2024.” Put up this case under the heading for “Orders” on -2- 3. Learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2 & 3 refers to paragraphs nos.4 & 5 of the show cause affidavit dated 10th May, 2024 filed on behalf of the said opposite parties, which read as under:- “4. That in the light of such direction the answering opposite parities have verified and have found that the salary for the period of suspension has already been paid to the petitioner. The same is explained in the table given below: Period of Suspension 11.06.2019 to 31.08.2019 Amount Paid During the Suspension 1,42,166/- Amount Paid on Revocation of Suspension/ Reinstatement 1,42,164/- (paid in October, 2019) 11.01.2020 to 2,90,277/- 2,63,184/- (paid in March, 2024 30.05.2020 along with the bakckwages for the period from June, 2020 to January, 2024) 5. That as far as the Medical Reimbursement is concerned, Letter dated 30.04.2024 has been written to the petitioner as the concerned section has made objection in the following terms:- (a) Signature of treating Doctor with seal is required in the Claim Form. (b) The Bills are not certified by the Doctor or the employee. (c) Certification of Doctor with seal / self-certification on bills required. (d) The Bills of Shri Purshottam Chaurasiya is required to be filled in I.P.D. Form and to be signed by the Doctor with seal. (d) The copy of investigation report is required to be attached along with the claims.” 4. It is further submitted that in view of the aforesaid objections, the petitioner is required to submit bill/claim form after rectifying the defects, which have been pointed out. Thereafter, the bill shall be processed in accordance with the extant rules of the University. It is thus, submitted that the aforesaid order of the Court has duly been complied by the opposite party nos.2 & 3. -3- 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that the order dated 21st December, 2021 passed in W.P. (S) No.1532 of 2020 has now been complied by the opposite party nos.2 & 3. Hence, there is no need to further proceed in the matter. The contempt proceeding as against the opposite parties is hereby dropped.
Decision
6. The present contempt case stands disposed of. 7. If the petitioner feels that pursuant to his reinstatement, all admissible dues have not been paid to him, he is at liberty to take appropriate recourse towards the same as permissible under law. Sanjay/vs (Rajesh Shankar, J.) -4-