Judgment 1. CWJC.No. 9220 of 1995: Ram Ugrah Sharma V/s. The Union of India and others succeeded with certain directions having been given that the promotion of the petitioner would be reckoned as also the consequential benefits as would accrue to him. The writ petition was allowed on 3 March 1997. After this a letters patent appeal had been filed. This was L.P.A.no. 523 of 1997. By this appeal the Court expressed reservations as to why it had been filed. The judgment on the writ petition was affirmed and a consequential direction was given that the matter relating to the benefits, which had accrued to the petitioner-appellant by promotion or otherwise, would be considered expeditiously and preferably within a period of four months as a direction in the letters patent appeal. The record was laid to rest. 2. Despite the direction in the letters patent appeal, it appears that nothing moved. Thus, the petitioner took out contempt proceedings and these were registered as MJC. No. 3747 of 1997. it is clear from the record of the contempt proceedings that despite the fact that it had been pending almost four years nothing apparently had been done to comply with the orders whether under the writ petition or the letters patent appeal. An order dated 10 November 2000 by a Division Bench (Hon ble Shashank Kr. Singh and Hon ble S. K. Katriar, JJ.) directed that the matter be adjourned and an affidavit filed during the first week of January 2001 showing compliance on the directions which had been given, in effect, on the writ petition and the letters patent appeal. 3. When the matter was listed on 2 January 2001 nothing was reported to the Court and instead the submission on be-half of the Union of India was to the effect that the counsel had instructions from an Assistant Director Legal to ake another adjournment. The Court felt that the matter had been taken too lightly. However, the adjournment sought was granted with the respondents being cautioned that if the orders of the Court are not complied with and an affidavit is not filed showing compliance then the Court may frame charges in this contempt action. 4. When the matter came up on 5 February 2001 the payment, in fact, had not been delivered to the petitioner and it had yet to be processed and made out in his favour. 4. When the matter came up on 5 February 2001 the payment, in fact, had not been delivered to the petitioner and it had yet to be processed and made out in his favour. On that day, the Court noticed that the arrears, which were being processed in favour of the petitioner amounted to delayed since 1997 to 2001. Thus, the Court indicated, simple interest @ 12% on the arrears and the case was adjourned to 22 February 2001. 5. On 26.2.2001 instead of complying with the order in making payments, that is, arrears and the interest the respondents were seeking modification of the order and were taking up the plea that interest was not payable and further implied that the matter had never been delayed. But there was no explanation on record why directions of the High Court in the writ petition and the letters patent appeal had not been complied with and been inordinately delayed. 6. Now, it left the Court with no option but to issue show cause to the respondents as to why the Court ought not to consider proceedings in contempt on the action already filed, the compliance yet not been made on the orders of the Court and taking up a defence on payment of interest, in effect, amounted to a plea that there had never been any delay. The plea taken, however, had not been justified on the record. 7. Summons were, thus, issued and the case was directed to be listed on 12 March 2001, i.e., today. 8. Today, Mr. J. P. Karn, Sr.S.C.C.G., has appeared. He has stated that he has instructions to state that the application/affidavit seeking modification of the orders that interest be deleted is not being pressed and, in fact, an affidavit has been filed today seeking an apology. The Court has perused the affidavit. It mentions nothing of any acquiescence to the order of the Court on the payment of interest nor does it mention anywhere that the application seeking modification of the orders directing interest be not pressed. 9. Mr. J. P. Karn, Sr.S.C.C.G., upon instructions from Mr. C. P. Singh, Inspector General of Police, Bihar Sector C.R.P.F., stated that the application dated 13.2.2001 seeking modification of the order dated 5.2.2001 is not being pressed. He has further made submission that an amount of Rs. 9. Mr. J. P. Karn, Sr.S.C.C.G., upon instructions from Mr. C. P. Singh, Inspector General of Police, Bihar Sector C.R.P.F., stated that the application dated 13.2.2001 seeking modification of the order dated 5.2.2001 is not being pressed. He has further made submission that an amount of Rs. 49,793/- representing simple interest @ 12% upon arrears as had been directed by the Court in the order dated 5.2.2001 is available with the officers for being deposited with the Registrar General, High Court. He also sought permission of the Court whether this be converted into a Bank Draft in the name of the petitioner and that the Bank Draft itself could be deposited with the Registrar General, High Court. 10. The submission of Mr. J, P. Karn, Sr.S.C.C.G.,, is accepted that the application seeking modification of the order of 5 February 2001 is not being pressed. Thus, that application dated 13.2.2001 stands consigned to the record upon the submission. Further, the submission of Mr. J. P. Karn, Sr.S.C.C.G., that instead of depositing the cash amount with the Registrar General, High Court, the amount will be represented in a Bank Draft in the name of the petitioner and this will be deposited within two days, the undertaking is accepted. 11. Let this be the close of the proceedings. No further orders are necessary. The notices on contempt proceedings, as directed by the order dated 26 February 2001, are discharged. 12. The contempt proceedings are consigned.