Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 1005 (PAT)

Md. Aslam Khan v. State Of Bihar

2003-09-12

RADHA MOHAN PRASAD

body2003
Judgment 1. In this writ petition, the petitioners, who claim to be legal heirs of Late Md. Hasim, who died in harness on 14.3.1988 while posted as Nazir in Makhdumpur Circle Office, Jehanabad, are aggrieved on account of non-release of G.P.F. amount of the deceased employee with up-to-date statutory interest. 2. The notice of this writ petition was given to the learned Advocate General appearing for the State officials including the District Provident Fund Officer, Gaya and Jehanabad on 22.5.2003. When the matter was first taken up on 2nd September, 2003 a counter affidavit was filed on behalf of the District Provident Fund Officer, Jehanabad (respondent no. 4) in which it was pleaded that he has not yet received the deduction statements as well as the final withdrawal Form-73 duly filled in and forwarded by the Drawing and Disbursing Officer concerned, namely, Circle Officer, Makhdumpur where the petitioners father was posted and died while in service. It was further stated that A.G.B.T. has also not been received so far. According to the said respondent, despite sincere efforts made by him so much so that even after personally contacting the Circle Officer, Makhdumpur, he has sent only deduction statement for two years from February, 1986 to February, 1988 vide his Memo No. 570 dated 16.11.2002. In the said counter affidavit it is stated that the District Magistrate, Jehanabad also directed the Circle Officer, Makhdumpur to make available the required papers immediately to the District Provident Fund Officer, Jehanabad vide letter No. 822 dated 7.8.2003. 3. The Circle Officer, Makhdumpur was added as respondent no. 5 vide order dated 2.9.2003. On the prayer made by the learned State counsel, the matter was adjourned for listing on 3rd September, 2003. Meanwhile the learned counsel for the State was directed to take instruction from the Circle Officer Makhdumpur. On 3rd September, 2003 the Circle Officer personally appeared before this court and stated that he would make available the entire deduction statement to the District Provident Fund Officer by 8.9.2003 whereupon the District Provident Fund Officer was directed to sue authorisation and produce it 9.9.2003 when this case was directe be listed under the same heading. However, it was not produced on 9.9.2003 and on the request of the learned counse the State the matter was passed over to enable him to take instruction from the Circle Officer. However, it was not produced on 9.9.2003 and on the request of the learned counse the State the matter was passed over to enable him to take instruction from the Circle Officer. On 10.9.2003 on instruction he stated that the Circle Officer appraised about the said order to the District Magistrate and still the District Magistrate directed him to proceed to Calcutta in connection with printing of ballot papers and accordingly he proceeded on 7th September, 2003. However, no explanation was given as to why deduction statement could not be collected in between 3rd September and 7th September, 2003. However, having failed to appreciate the manner in which the District Magistrate and the Circle Officer conducted themselves, this court suomotu initiated contempt proceeding against them, which has been registered as M.J.C. No. 1756/2003 and directed them to personally appear and file their show cause on Friday next (12.9.2003) when the matter was directed to be listed within top-five cases alongwith the contempt matter for final disposal. 4. The District Magistrate and the Circle Officer both have personally appeared and filed their respective show cause. The District Magistrate in paragraph 4 of the show cause stated that the Circle Officer, Makhdumpur had submitted letter No. 341 dated 6.9.2003 addressed to him wherein he had stated that he had to be personally present before this Court on 9.9.2003 but he overlooked to see the entire letter of the Circle Officer minutely due to his very busy schedule in conducting the process of election of the Zila Parishad and Panchayat election which were scheduled to be held in the District on 7.9.2003 and 9.9.2003 and conducting of the repoll on 11.9.2003, coupled with the unfortunate death of Srikant Jha, a Polling personnel and very bad law and order situation in the entire district which is extremist infested. He has further admitted that the Circle Officer was sent to Calcutta for the purpose of reprinting of ballot papers. He however, has tendered unqualified apology. 5. The Circle Officer in his show cause has stated that he checked and verified the deduction statement of the officials of three postings, namely, at Gaya Block, Makhdumpur Anchal and Karpi Block which was handed over to the District Provident Fund Officer, Jehanabad and the District Provident Fund Officer issued authority slip pursuant to which a cheque of Rs. 8,584/- in favour of the petitioner has been produced. 8,584/- in favour of the petitioner has been produced. In paragraph 7 he has however admitted that the entire deduction statement has not been made available to the District Provident Fund Officer. He, however, stated that in compliance of the order dated 3.9.2003 deduction statement of other places of postings of the deceased are being tried to be obtained and for that letters have been issued to the District Provident Fund Officer, Jehanabad (Establishment), Deputy Collectors of Gaya and Jehanabad, Subdivisional Officer and the District Magistrate, Jehanabad. 6. Mr. Dutta, learned Standing counsel appearing for the District Magistrate as well as for the Circle Officer submitted that in fact there was no direction given to the District Magistrate which has been violated. 7. It is true that as per direction of this Court, the District Magistrate should not have overlooked letter No. 341 dated 6.9.2003 of the Circle Officer and should have avoided to send him to Calcutta on 7th September, 2003. As regards non-compliance of the order by the Circle Officer, he submitted that obtaining of deduction statement from other places of posting like Aurangabad, D.C.L.R., Gaya, S.D.O. Gaya, Gaya Block, Imamganj Block etc. will take some more time. 8. I fail to appreciate the attitude of the Circle Officer, Makhdumpur. The petitioners have been kept deprived of the provident fund amount now for over 15 long years since the death of deceased employee. On 3rd September, 2003 the Circle Officer, Makhdumpur personally appeared before this Court and stated that he would make available the entire deduction statement to the District Provident Fund Officer by 8th September, 2003. Despite this undertaking he simply wrote to the District Offices as claimed by him in his show cause and waited for receipt of deduction statement. He did not take any further step personally to ensure compliance of the undertaking to handover the deduction statement to the District Provident Fund Officer by 8th September, 2003. He did not even choose to file any petition for extension of time even if there was any genuine difficulty in complying with the said order of this Court. This Court asked the Circle Officer as to whether he wants to defend himself by filing any further affidavit to which he answered in negative. He did not even choose to file any petition for extension of time even if there was any genuine difficulty in complying with the said order of this Court. This Court asked the Circle Officer as to whether he wants to defend himself by filing any further affidavit to which he answered in negative. It has become usual feature that officials neither comply with the order nor approach this Court for extension of time and take it for granted that they would be spared. The same thing has happened in the present case also as is evident from the aforementioned facts. From the aforementioned conduct of the Circle Officer, this Court finds that he has wilfully disobeyed the order of this Court and accordingly, holds him guilty for committing contempt and convicts him with simple imprisonment for three days. 9. Learned Govt. Pleader No. IV has submitted that respondent no. 5 intends to prefer an appeal against the conviction and as such, he prays for suspension of execution of the order of punishment for two weeks. 10. Accordingly, this Court in the facts and circumstances suspends the execution of the order of punishment for two weeks, whereupon respondent no. 5 shall surrender before the Registrar (General) for serving punishment unless otherwise directed in appeal, if any, preferred by him. 11. Having regard to the show cause filed by the District Magistrate the apology tendered by him is accepted but with caution that he in future should be vigilant in the matter of compliance of the order. The contempt proceeding initiated against him is thus dropped. 12. The cheque produced today has been handed over to the learned counsel for the petitioners. 13. Accordingly, the M.J.C. application is disposed of. The writ application is also disposed of with the direction that the District Magistrate, Jehanabad shall ensure to make available the entire remaining deduction statements to the District Provident Fund Officer. Jehanabad within a week whereupon the District Provident Fund Officer shall issue authorisation forthwith and ensure payment of the remaining amount to the petitioners by handing over cheque/Bank draft to the learned counsel for the petitioners with details of calculation within two days thereafter.