SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(Del) 88

MANMOHAN
R. S. MISHRA – Appellant
Versus
RANGLAL JAMUDA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Petitioner in person.
Mr. S. Rajappa and Mr. N.B. Joshi, Advocates

MANMOHAN, J

1. The present contempt petition has been filed under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 alleging willful disobedience by the respondents of the Division Bench judgment and order dated 19th September, 2007 wherein this Court had directed that the petitioner was entitled to double House Rent Allowance (in short HRA) for the period from 30th October, 2000 to 30th June, 2003. The amount was directed to be paid to the petitioner within eight weeks and if the needful was not done, respondents were directed to pay interest on the said amount at the rate of 12% per annum. The relevant portion of the Division Bench judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:- 5. The petitioner is a resident of Gurgaon and, therefore, when his services were terminated at Rajkot, there was no reason or occasion for him to stay at Rajkot. After the termination of his services he had shifted to his residence at Gurgaon and filed writ petition in the High Court of Delhi challenging his termination. From the date of his termination in the year 1988 till October 2000 when orders for reinstatement were passed and he was transferred to Imphal, he remained at Gurgaon, namely, the place of his






Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top