JUDGMENT A.M. Sapre, J. Heard Mr. D. Mazumdar, learned for the petitioner and Mr. J. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the respondents on advance notice. 2. This contempt petition is filed under sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Court’s Act, 1971 read with the provisions of Contempt of Court (Gauhati High Court) Rules, 1977 and Article 215 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner of Writ Appeal No.316 of 2009 decided by the Division Bench on 21.02.2013. 3. By the order under consideration out of which this contempt petition arises, the Division Bench of this Court allowed the writ appeal with the direction to the respondent Corporation to pass appropriate order to remove the anomaly determining the pay of employees in the higher cadre at least one rupee higher than the pay scale of its employees in the feeder cadre. 4. The operative part of the order dated 21.02.2013 rendered in the connected Writ Appeal No.316 of 2009 reads as follows:- “Learned counsel for the Union of India submitted that there was no bar for the Corporation to remove the anomalies in the pay of its employees. On due consideration, we find that the employees in higher cadre cannot get lesser pay than the employees in the feeder cadre. There is merit in the contention raised that the appellants have to be paid at least one rupee higher than the employees in the feeder cadre. Accordingly, we allow this appeal and direct the respondent Corporation to pass appropriate order to remove the anomaly determining the pay of employees in the higher cadre at least one rupee higher than the pay scale of its employees in the feeder cadre within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 5. Counsel for the petitioner, however, in this contempt complains that despite petitioner serving a legal notice on the respondents, the respondents have not considered the case of the petitioner. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents, on advance notice, we are inclined to dispose of this contempt petition by extending the period fixed in the order dated 21.02.2013 for its implementation by a further period of 3(three) months from today, as an outer limit provided no appeal is filed by the respondents and no stay is obtained of the order impugned therein. In other words, if no appeal is filed by the respondents and if filed and yet no stay is obtained, then order dated 21.02.2013 passed in Writ Appeal No.316 of 2009 shall have to be complied with in letter and spirit by the respondents within 3(three) months from the date of this order. In case if order is not complied with even within the extended period fixed by the Court subject to what is discussed above, the respondents and all other authorities responsible for ensuring compliance shall be held guilty for committing contempt of this Court order and appropriate order(s) imposing punishment as provided under the Contempt of Courts’ Act would be passed against each of them. 7. The learned counsel for the respondents are requested to forward a copy of this order along with the copy of the original order dated 21.02.2013 passed in Writ Appeal No.316 of 2009 to the respondents, i.e. the official concerned to enable them to ensure compliance as directed. The respondents will also communicate the compliance report to the petitioner as soon as it is complied with within the period fixed by this Court. 8. Subject to the aforesaid, this contempt petition stands disposed of. No cost.