Ram Raj Tiwary vs J.S.E.B. & Ors on 6 February, 2009

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                       Cont.(Civil)Case No. 484 of 2008
                                   ....
           Ram Raj Tiwary                                            .... Petitioner
                               Versus
           J.S.E.B. & ors.                                           ..Opp.Parties

                          CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                                    ....
           For the petitioner          : Mr.Binod Kumar
           For the Opp.Parties         : Mr.S.Ranjan
                                    ....
 3/ 6.2.2009

This is a petition for contempt alleging non-compliance of the

order dated 7.4.2006 by which a batch of writ petitions were disposed of,

including the writ petition bearing W.P.(S) No. 4389 of 2004, which is the

subject matter of the present contempt petition, observing therein that the

admitted retiral dues legally payable to the petitioner be paid to them by

handing over a cheque to the claimants on 7.5.2006 before the Lok Adalat,

which was to be held in the High Court premises. The learned Single Judge

further observed that if the Board disagrees or refuses to pay any of the

claim, the same shall be communicated to the petitioner forthwith.

Having heard the counsel for the parties, it is clear that the

admitted retiral dues have already been paid to the petitioner but he has

claimed further amount as per his calculation. That part has also been dealt

with by the respondent as the respondent has already communicated reasons

to the petitioner as to why additional amount is not payable to him.

Whether the additional amount is payable to the petitioner or not,

cannot be made a subject matter of contempt petition as that might be a

separate cause of action to be raised at the appropriate Forum. In sofar as

this contempt petition is concerned, no case for contempt is made out , in the

light of the aforesaid discussions.

The contempt petition, therefore, is dismissed.

( Gyan Sudha Misra, C.J.)

G.Jha/