JUDGMENT : Pramath Patnaik, J.: The instant Contempt Petition has been filed against non-compliance of order dated 15.05.2017 passed in W.P. (S) No. 4860 of 2016. 2. Heard Mr. Amit Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Binod Singh, learned S.C. (L &C) being assisted by Mr. Sarvendra Kumar, A.C to learned S.C. (L & C) for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though statement was made by respondents in counter affidavit filed in W.P. (S) No. 4860 of 2016 that payment against retiral dues have been processed but till date all the retiral dues have not been paid. But, it has been admitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that amount against pension and gratuity has been paid to the petitioner however interest on delayed payment has not been paid. It has further been submitted that after disposal of the writ application, the petitioner has received notice from the office of respondents vide letter dated 04.01.2018 for recovery of amount of Rs. 4,56,347.50/-, from the remaining dues of amount of retiral benefits of his father. In this regard, it has further been submitted that the departmental proceeding initiated against the father of the petitioner has earlier been dropped by the Department vide letter dated 17.11.2016 under such circumstances, the recovery is bad in law in a case where his father has died in the year 2013 itself. 4. As against this, learned counsel for the Opposite Parties referring to tabular chart depicted in paragraph 19 of the supplementary counter affidavit submitted that all the reitral dues have been paid and nothing remains to be adjudicated in this case. 5. So far recovery of Rs. 4,56,347.50 is concerned, it has been submitted by learned counsel for the respondents that late Arvind Kumar, the father of the petitioner, the then Range Officer at Forest, Deoghar Terrotorial Range of Deoghar Forest Divison was given an amount of Rs. 1,47,81,876.00 as forest advance under different heads during the financial year 2010-11 and 2011-12, but, in the year 2013 he died before submission of account of said amount. However, from the vouchers and payment receipts, it came to surface that an amount of Rs. 4,56,347.50 was not accounted for and is due against the deceased-employee. 1,47,81,876.00 as forest advance under different heads during the financial year 2010-11 and 2011-12, but, in the year 2013 he died before submission of account of said amount. However, from the vouchers and payment receipts, it came to surface that an amount of Rs. 4,56,347.50 was not accounted for and is due against the deceased-employee. For the said reason, an enquiry committee was constituted, who after due verification submitted its report dated 25.08.2017, basing on which, the authorities ascertained and determined the misappropriated amount of Rs. 4,56,347.50 as recoverable amount and directed to do the needful as per Rules. 6. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that recovery after the death of the petitioner i.e. behind the back of the deceased-employee is violative of principles of natural justice. 7. Before proceeding further, it would be apposite to reproduce the impugned order dated 15.05.2017 as under: “In the accompanied writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for direction upon the respondent to make payment of retiral benefit of his father. Heard Mr. Amit Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Navin Singh, J.C to G.A. III for the respondents. Referring to paragraph 24, 25 and 26 of the counter affidavit, learned counsel for the respondents submits that family pension and gratuity of the petitioner has been sanctioned and further pension performa along with gratuity and unutilized leave etc have been sent to Principal Chief Conservator of Forest for approval as per the provisions of law and immediately after its approval benefits of retiral dues shall be extended to the petitioner. In view of the specific averments made in the counter affidavit, the writ petition stands disposed of.” 8. On perusal of impugned order, it appears that in the writ application the petitioner has prayed for payment of retiral dues. The said writ application was disposed of in view of the averments made in the writ application. 9. On the pleadings available on the record, it appears that substantially the order under contempt for non-compliance of order passed in writ application has been complied with, as evident from paragraph 19 of the supplementary show cause affidavit dated 30.07.2018. The said writ application was disposed of in view of the averments made in the writ application. 9. On the pleadings available on the record, it appears that substantially the order under contempt for non-compliance of order passed in writ application has been complied with, as evident from paragraph 19 of the supplementary show cause affidavit dated 30.07.2018. For better appreciation, paragraph 19 of the supplementary show cause dated 30.07.2018, containing the tabular chart, is reproduced herein below: “19.That it is humbly stated that a tabular chart of the retiral benefits payment made and the amount recovered is being given herein for this Hon’ble Courts convenience. Sl No. Retiral Dues Amount Payment Recovery 1 Payment of Family Pension (1.)Rs. 8920/- per month with effect from 20.01.2013 to 19.01.2013 (2.)Rs. 5352/- per month after 19.01.2013 Effected 2. Payment of Death-cum-Gratuity Rs. 770688 Rs. 770688 -- 3. Payment of unutilized earned leave Rs. 290614 Rs. 45266 Rs.245348/- 10. For the discussions made herein above, as the order has substantially been complied with, the contempt proceeding is dropped. However, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge order of recovery and consequent notice of recovery or any for other relief before the appropriate forum.