Contempt dropped, original order complied; no intentional disobedience found.

The petitioner, Bisan Deo Tiwari, filed a contempt petition alleging non-compliance with a judgment and order dated October 9, 2014, in O.A. No. 363 of 2012

The original order dated October 9, 2014, directed the respondents to furnish details of alleged debits along with relevant documents to the applicant within one month, failing which they were to ensure payment of outstanding retiral dues with 12% p.a. simple interest from the date of retirement

The respondents submitted various affidavits, communications, and letters addressing the applicant's grievance and dues

An additional affidavit of compliance dated September 19, 2023, furnished details of the alleged debits from the applicant’s DCRG

This included a breakdown of the DCRG, Leave, GIS, and Commll. amounts due, along with specific deductions for "Gayaunit," "Mgs Unit," and "Commll. Debit," totaling Rs. 462028.25

The communication indicated that after these deductions, the remaining amount was paid, and specifically, the Rs. 30,000 "Comml Debit" was paid via CO7 No. 0918700484 dated October 5, 2018

1. Whether the respondents have complied in substance with the judgment and order dated October 9, 2014, by furnishing the requisite details regarding the alleged debits to the petitioner

2. Whether there is sufficient ground to proceed under the Contempt of Courts Act due to intentional or wilful disobedience of the Tribunal's order

The court applied principles governing compliance with judicial orders and the initiation of contempt proceedings, which require a finding of intentional or wilful disobedience for a case under the Contempt of Courts Act

The core legal framework for addressing non-compliance involves assessing whether the directions contained in the original judgment have been "complied with in substance"

The court found that the respondents had substantially complied with the directions from the original order dated October 9, 2014

The original direction required the respondents to furnish details of alleged debits

The court noted that the respondents had filed multiple affidavits and communications, including an additional affidavit of compliance dated September 19, 2023, which provided specific details of the alleged debits and retiral dues to the applicant (Bisan Deo Tiwari)

This detailed breakdown included the initial amounts for DCRG, Leave, GIS, and Commll., and specific deductions for "Gayaunit," "Mgs Unit," and "Commll. Debit," indicating that the remaining amount was paid

The court explicitly stated that the "requisite details regarding the alleged debits have been furnished to the petitioner"

Consequently, the court concluded that there was no "cogent material to establish intentional or wilful disobedience of the order of this Tribunal"

Therefore, no case for proceeding under the Contempt of Courts Act was made out

The contempt petition was dropped, and the notices issued to the alleged contemnors were discharged

The court further held that if the petitioner remained aggrieved, he was at liberty to pursue appropriate remedies before a competent forum in accordance with the law