Full Judgment Text
NONREPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
MISC. APPLICATION No.1712 of 2018
WITH
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO.38501/2018
IN
MISC. APPLICATION No.711 of 2017
IN
CIVIL APPEAL No.4482 OF 1998
Rajeshwar Mahto ….Appellant(s)
VERSUS
Alok Kumar Gupta, G.M.
M/s Birla Corporation Ltd. …Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.
1. We heard Mr. Rajeshwar Mahto
applicant/appellant appearedin person and also
heard Ms. N.Annapoorani, learned counsel
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
ANITA MALHOTRA
Date: 2018.09.25
17:13:16 IST
Reason:
appointed by Supreme Court Legal services
1
Committee to assist the applicant in support of his
applications.
2. These two aforementioned applications arise
out of Civil Appeal No. 4482 of 1998 and M.A. No.
711/2017 decided by this Court’s detailed order
dated 23.02.2018.
3. By detailed order dated 23.02.2018, this Court
disposed of Misc. Application No. 711/2017 and
Contempt Petition No.785/2018 in C.A. No.4482 of
1998 and gave relief to the applicant which reads as
under:
“27. On applicant’s vacating the quarter
within the time fixed by this Court, the
Corporation will accordingly pay to the
applicant Rs.7,50,000/ by demand draft
within one week from the date of vacating
the quarter.
28. With these directions, the contempt
petition stands disposed of. Rule Nisi, if
issued, stands discharged against the alleged
contemnor.”
2
4. Now it appears that the applicant is not
satisfied with the grant of the aforesaid monetary
relief to him and, therefore, he has again filed these
applications.
5. In substance, the applicant wants more money
than what was awarded to him by this Court’s
order dated 23.02.2018. From his oral submissions,
what we could gather is that he now claims towards
his salary etc. more than one crore or so whereas
we have awarded to him Rs.7,50,000/ in full and
final satisfaction of his total service claim.
6. He had also filed application for modification
against the order dated 23.02.2018.
7. We have perused the applications carefully
with a view to find out as to whether our order
dated 23.02.2018 requires any further modification
3
so as to grant to the applicant more than what we
have granted already ( Rs.7,50,000/) .
8. Having perused, we find ourselves unable to
accept the applicant’s prayer made in these
applications and also in his submissions. In our
opinion, the prayer made by the applicant has no
factual and legal basis.
9. The order dated 23.02.2018 is quite a
reasoned order wherein this Court has taken into
consideration the entire factual and legal aspects of
the case, all previous orders passed in the main
case out of which the contempt petition arose, the
effect and consequences of the orders passed in the
matters, applicant’s monthly emoluments, his
length of service period, and all his other legal
entitlements payable under various heads and then
worked out the final figure of Rs.7,50,000/ for
being paid to him by his employer.
4
10. There is no error much less apparent error in
the order dated 23.02.2018 which may persuade us
to further modify and award more money than what
was awarded to the applicant. The applicant has to
be now satisfied with the order dated 23.02.2018.
11. The applicant, in his submission, mainly urged
one issue that he needs money for the marriage of
his daughter. If that be the position then the
amount of Rs.7,50,000/ can be used by him for
performing the marriage of his daughter.
12. With these observations, the applications made
by the applicant and which are listed today are
dismissed.
5
13. We finally grant three months’ time to the
applicant to vacate the quarter, which he has still
continued to occupy, and accept the amount of
Rs.7,50,000/ from his employer (respondents
herein) in terms of the order dated 23.02.2018.
…………………………………..J.
(ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE)
….………..……………………….…J.
(MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR)
New Delhi,
September 24, 2018
6