Contempt regarding ‘Pay Anomaly’
Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Aug 29: In a contempt petition, High Court today granted last opportunity to the Chief Secretary and Finance Secretary to comply with the judgement about removal of pay anomaly.
After hearing counsel for the contempt petition, Justice Sanjeev Kumar observed, “the contempt petition has been filed for implementation of judgement whereby benefit of SRO-75 of 1992 was allowed to the members of the judicial service, who were petitioners in SWP No.529/92”, adding “in the present case, same benefit is being sought by the petitioners who are holding civil posts on the executive side”.
“The judgment passed by this court dated 17.05.2001 and affirmed by the Supreme Court is yet to be complied with by the respondents in letter and spirit. They are supposed to issue an SRO amending the Schedule of SRO 75 of 1992 dated 30.03.1992 in the same manner they issued SRO 163 of 2005 in the case of District Judges”, Justice Kumar said.
“Let me make it clear and emphatic that the Superintending Engineers and the District Judges are required to be treated at par and this is clear and categoric import of the judgment sought to be implemented in these proceedings. Simply, because the compliance of the concluded judgment of a court involves huge financial implications, the respondents cannot avoid the compliance”, Justice Kumar said.
“The respondents, despite being well aware of the import of the judgment, as is apparent from the memorandum prepared by the Finance Department for submission to the Cabinet for complying with the judgment in the case of Superintending Engineers and subsequently the order passed by the Division Bench on 28.05.2015 and interlocutory order passed by this Court in these contempt proceedings on 05.10.2017, have strangely adopted an adamant attitude and have given impression to the court that they are above law and are the final interpreters of the judgment passed by this court”, Justice Kumar said.
“The conduct exhibited by the respondents, on the face of it, is contemptuous and respondents are, therefore, prima-facie in contempt”, High Court and asked the respondents to show cause as to why they be not punished.
“I deem it appropriate to afford them a last opportunity of four weeks to come up with full compliance of the judgment dated 17.05.2001 and also ensure that not only orders on papers are passed but the benefits flowing from such orders passed in compliance to the judgment also reach the beneficiaries, i.e., all Superintending Engineers as have been held entitled to by the judgment sought to be complied with in these contempt proceedings”, Justice Sanjeev Kumar said.
Follow our WhatsApp channel