Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 299 (PAT)

Urmila Pathak v. State of Bihar

2012-02-22

RAKESH KUMAR

body2012
ORDER Heard Shri Arbind Nath Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Ranjan Kumar, learned A.C. to A.A.G.13. 2. The present petition was filed for initiating contempt proceeding against the opposite parties for non compliance of the order dated 18.12.2010 passed in C.W.J.C. No.1975 of 2010. In this case, show cause as well as supplementary show cause has been filed on behalf of opposite party no.8 i.e. Superintending Engineer, Building Nirupan Circle 1, Building Construction Department, wherein it has been indicated that almost all the grievances of the petitioner have already been redressed. So far as arrear of salary of the husband of the petitioner for the period between 1.5.2005 and 8.8.2005 is concerned, it has been indicated that husband of the petitioner was posted in Jharkhand at different places and details were not available to the office of opposite party no.8. So far as remaining amount of G.P.F. is concerned, a show cause has been filed by Joint Commissioner, Accounts and Administration, G.P.F. Directorate, Bihar, Patna, though the Joint Commissioner was not impleaded either in the writ petition or in the present contempt proceeding as party. 3. In the show cause filed by the Joint Commissioner, it has been indicated that Directorate has already issued authorization for an amount of Rs.7,55,138/- along with interest and was sent to the department. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the fact that authorization by the Directorate of G.P.F. was issued on 14.1.2012, till date the said amount has not been credited to the account of the petitioner. 5. After hearing the parties and perusing the show cause filed by the opposite party no.8 as well as show cause of Joint Commissioner, Accounts and Administration, G.P.F. Directorate, Bihar, Patna, the court is of the opinion that substantially the order of this Court dated 8.12.2010 has already been complied with. So far as amount of the G.P.F. as authorized by the Directorate of Provident Fund is concerned, the court expects that the opposite parties, particularly opposite party no.8 will take immediate steps so that the amount authorized may be credited to the account of the petitioner without any delay. Regarding arrear of salary and other reliefs, the opposite party no.8 may take appropriate steps so that grievances may be redressed without un-necessary delay. Accordingly, the contempt proceeding is hereby dropped.