U. C. Srivastava, J.@mdashThis is an application under Section 12 of the Contempt of Court Act for punishing the oppositeparty who is Commandant, XI Battalion, P. A. C., Sitapur. The Petitioner who is police constable was suspended vide order 1st September, 1986, against which he filed a writ petition on 23rd September, 1986 in which a Division Bench of this Court passed the following interim order on 25th September, 1986 :
"In the meantime the suspension order, dated 12986 contained in Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition shall remain stayed. It will be open for the oppositeparties to take or not to take work from the petitioner, but he shall be paid his salary regularly every month. It will also be open for the oppositeparties to post him anywhere, where he can be posted."
2. As per allegation the petitioner handed over the photo copy of the stay order to the opposite party on 26th September, 1986, but he did not honour the order and refused to pay him monthly emoluments and it is he who disregarded the order. The matter came before the learned Single Judge on 20th March, 1987 when a direction was given to the oppositeparty to pay salary to the applicant though in the order the date of order, dated 25986 has wrongly been mentioned due to typing mistake, but even then the monthly salary was not paid to the petitioner and thereby oppositeparty committed contempt of Court.
3. Tae oppositeparty 51ed a counteraffidavit and thereafter parties exchanged further affidavits. The case of the oppositeparty is that the petitioner was remove from service, but in view of the interim order he was reinstated back in service and was again suspended on 4121986 in view of the fact that the criminal case under Section 409, I. P. C. was pending against him. He was subsequently dismissed. So far as his first suspension order is concerned, the salary was paid to him and he complied with the interim order. According to him salary for the months of September and October 1986 was paid to him though the petitioner''s grievance is that the entire amount was not paid, but this much is certain that salary for the months of September and October 1986 was not paid as directed by the interim order. It is averred in the affidavit that he was not aware of the interim order and he was made aware of it on 20th October, 1987, but this is not at all believing. A party who guts interim order cannot sit idle over the matter. Whether the entire amount has been paid or not, but this much is clear that salary for the months of September and October 1985 vas not paid and the payment was made to the petitioner on 19ch May, 1987. In his affidavit the oppositeparty stated that the petitioner was suspended according to law. It was not for him to decide what was according to law. The Court gave a positive order for payment of salary which was not complied with of which the oppositeparty had a knowledge and the compliance which was made by him was done at a late stage and according to him what he did was in accordance with law. He had no right to decide what was according to law when once a direction was given by this Court. Obviously he has transgressed Us limit and entered into the arena of contempt, but in view of the tact that the payment was made and the petitioner was suspended subsequently, it is not a case in which apart from reprimanding him any punishment be awarded. Accordingly the opposity party is reprimanded and is directed to be cautious in future. The contempt petition stands disposed of accordingly.
