Dinesh Kumar Singh, J. - (1.) This Court while allowing of the Writ Petition No.6474(SS) of 2014 inter alia on 13.11.2014 passed the following order:- "This writ petition has been filed for writ in the nature of mandamus for commanding the opposite parties to take into account the past service of the petitioner rendered in the Auto Tractors Ltd., Pratapgarh, for the purpose of qualifying him to post-retiral benefits. Briefly stated facts are that petitioner was appointed on the post of Semi Skilled A in the pay scale of Rs. 410-640 in the year 1983 in Auto Tractors Ltd. at Pratapgarh, an Undertaking of State Government. Since petitioner's industry was declared as sick and was closed on 20.11.1990, entire Staff was compelled to be retrenched. State Government had taken a decision to absorb the retrenched employees. Petitioner was absorbed as Assistant Boring Technician vide letter dated 05.03.1997, on the lower salary post. Petitioner joined on the said post on 18.03.1997. Grievance of the petitioner is that he has been deprived to get a proper pay protection benefit without any fault of his own. Controversy is squarely covered by decision of a Division Bench of this Court given in the case of Hridayesh Dayal Srivastava Vs. State of U.P. And others [Writ Petition No. 410 of 2010 (SB)]. In Para 21 of the judgment it is said that with regard to the pay scale and the actual pay to which petitioner was entitled could have been sanctioned as personal pay to protect the last salary drawn. Division Bench has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court given in the case of Chittaranjan Sharma and others Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and another, 1996 3 ESC 622 (SC)] wherein direction to maintain the pay scales and to make adjustment and absorption, was found to be correct. Division Bench took the view that past service of the petitioner are liable to be considered for time bound pay scales and other benefits. SLP against the order of Division Bench was dismissed. In the case of Chandra Bhushan Pathak Vs. State of U.P. And others [Writ Petition No. 8568 of 2010(SS)], this Court was of the view that respondents are found to give all the consequential benefits admissible to the petitioner by taking into account the service rendered in M/s Auto Tractors Limited. Learned Standing Counsel fairly accepted that petitioner's case is squarely covered by the judgment of Hridayesh Dayal Srivastava Vs. State of U.P. And others [Writ Petition No. 410 of 2010 (SB)]. In view of the above, writ petition succeeds and is allowed. Respondents are directed to give all the consequential benefits taking into account the service rendered by the petitioner in Auto Tractors Ltd., Pratapgarh for the purpose of retiral benefits. Interest @ 8% per annum shall also be paid for unpaid post-retiral dues including pension."
(2.) In pursuance to the notice issued in the contempt petition, compliance affidavit of Smt. Anita Singh, Principal Secretary, Department of Minor Irrigation & Ground Water, Government of U.P. has been tendered today in the Court which is taken on record. "In para 5 of the aforesaid affidavit, it has been specifically stated that in pursuance of judgment and order dated 13.11.2014 mentioned hereinabove, pension of the petitioner has been recalculated and fixed after including the services rendered by him in Auto Tractor Limited, Pratapgarh. The order for the aforesaid purpose dated 23.07.2019 has also been annexed with the affidavit of compliance. Vide letter dated 26.07.2019, it has been directed to pay interest @ 8% per annum on the retirement dues of the petitioner."
(3.) In view of the aforesaid and order passed for complying the judgment and order dated 13.11.2014, nothing survives in the contempt petition, which is hereby dismissed as having become infructuous.;