Back
J. K. MAHESHWARI, RAJESH BINDAL
Yugeshwar Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Sanjay Kumar – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The petitioner in the present contempt petition has approached inter-alia contending that by virtue of the interim orders dated 11.07.2019 and 07.08.2019 passed in Contempt Petition (C) No. 1188 of 2018 titled as “Baidya Nath Choudhary Vs. Dr. Sree Surendra Kumar Singh” in Civil Appeal No. 2703 of 2017 and batch titled as “Krishna Nand Yadav & others Vs. Magadh University & others”, his arrears of salary and pension have not been finalized, which may amount to disobedience of the order of this Court.
2. Briefly put, the petitioner was appointed on the post of lecturer. The claim of the petitioner regarding absorption was allowed by Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha (Retd.) One Man Commission (hereinafter referred to as ‘J. Sinha Commission’). The said order was confirmed by this Court vide order dated 31.08.2017 in Krishna Nand Yadav (supra), subject to furnishing declaration by the petitioner regarding continuously working and attending the college regularly since the date of appointment till date, or in case of retirement till the date of retirement and that he did not work anywhere else. Vide notification dated 13.07.2018 of the Magadh University, he was absorbed.
3. In the presen
Contempt proceedings require adjudication of salary and pension issues through a discrete enquiry by university authorities, emphasizing compliance with court orders.
The court emphasizes the need for factual inquiry into salary Arrears and pension, despite prior non-compliance orders.
The court emphasized that issues of salary and pension require factual inquiry and cannot be resolved through contempt proceedings.
The court mandated a fact-finding enquiry to resolve disputes over salary and pension payments, ensuring compliance with interim orders and due process.
The court directed the University to adjudicate the issues of salary and pension for the petitioner based on actual working, emphasizing the need for a discrete inquiry.
The court emphasizes the need for a fact-finding enquiry to resolve issues of salary and pension payment following absorption orders, ensuring compliance with prior court directives.
The court emphasized the necessity of a fact-finding enquiry to determine the actual working status of petitioners for salary and pension claims, as they were not parties to the original appeal.
The court emphasized the necessity of a fact-finding enquiry to determine salary and pension claims for petitioners not originally part of the appeal, directing proper adjudication by university auth....
The court mandated a fair inquiry into salary and pension claims, emphasizing procedural fairness and adherence to prior absorption orders.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
