D.N.Patel,J. - (1.) Counsel for the applicant submitted that previously this applicant has preferred a writ petition, being C.W.J.C. No. 5813 of 1997(P), which was finally disposed of by this Court vide order dated 11th April, 2007 and as the said order has not been complied with, this contempt application was filed. It is further submitted by counsel for the applicant that though accumulated salary has been paid but she is not getting the current salary, in spite of the fact that she is still serving the concerned minority school. Another writ petition, being W.P.(S) No. 3371 of 2006 was filed by the applicant for enhancement of the salary on the basis of several grounds including the ground that this petitioner is trained and therefore, trained scale should be given. The said writ petition has also been allowed vide order dated 22nd July, 2013 and the directions given in that writ petition has also not been complied with. Therefore, another contempt application, being Cont. Case (Civil) No. 339 of 2014 has been preferred, which is pending at present before this court and therefore, respondents must pay the current salary at least if not enhanced salary.
(2.) Counsel for the State, learned Advocate General, vehemently submitted that the order for non compliance of which this contempt application has been filed has now been complied with. There was a two fold direction given by the this court vide order dated 11th April, 2007 in C.W.J.C. No. 5813 of 1997(P). One is about the arrears of salary and second is regarding current salary. In compliance of the said order, for the period running from 1st April, 1994 to 14th November, 2000, i.e. before the bifurcation of erstwhile State of Bihar into State of Bihar and State of Jharkhand, arrears of salary amounting to Rs. 2,47,911/-has been calculated and paid to the petitioner. Second period is with respect to the service of the petitioner in the State of Jharkhand after bifurcation. For this period running from 15th November, 2000 to 31st August, 2005 also the arrears of salary amounting to Rs. 2,75,910/- has been calculated and paid. These facts are stated in Annexure B and A, respectively, to the counter affidavit dated 12th December, 2014 and if these facts are accepted by this court then the present contempt application may be dismissed. It is further submitted by the Advocate General that a part of the argument adduced by the appellant today regarding rendering of service by the appellant after 31st August, 2005 is a disputed question of fact as there is an order passed by the State not to take work from this petitioner for several reasons including the reason that she was not legally appointed. This order was challenged by way of a separate writ, being W.P.(S) No. 3371 of 2006, which was allowed and against which the State has preferred a Letters Patent Appeal, being L.P.A. No. 223 of 2014, which is pending before a Division Bench of this Court. Further, in connection with this writ petition another contempt application, being Cont. Case(Civil) No. 339 of 2014 is also pending before this Court. Thus, for the period after 31st August, 2005, no salary has been paid because there are all chances that this Letters Patent Appeal preferred by the State may be allowed. Even otherwise also, whenever there is a disputed question of facts involved, there can not be any willful disobedience and hence no contempt of court has been committed by the respondents and sofar as the order for non-compliance of which this contempt application has been preferred, the same has been complied with in its true spirit and letters as stated herein above.
(3.) Having heard counsel for both sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason to entertain this case filed for alleged deliberate breach of the order dated 11th April, 2007 passed by this court in C.W.J.C. No. 5813 of 1997(P) mainly for the following facts and reasons: (I) It appears that this applicant is the original petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 5813 of 1997 (P). She is a Teacher in a minority aided school and the petition was preferred for payment of her salary, which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 11th April, 2007 and its operative part is quoted hereunder: "In view of the peculiar circumstances, the impugned order of respondent no.3 is not sustainable in the present case. In any case, the salary of the petitioner cannot be stopped or withheld when she has performed the duties regularly. This petition is accordingly allowed and it is directed that the petitioner will be paid the salary for the period she has performed the duties. In the event, petitioner continues in service, she will be paid her salary till such time she continues in service, she will be paid her salary till such time she continues in service, I am not inclined to quash Annexure-7 which is a general circular as it may affect other relevant cases. Let arrears of salary of the petitioner be disbursed within a period of three months from the date a copy of this order is served upon respondent no. 3" (II) it appears that as per the above direction, the State has to calculate and pay the arrears of salary and if the petitioner continues in service then the current salary also. The respondent State has stated in the affidavit dated 12th December, 2014, to be read with Annexure A and B thereof, that for the period running from 1st April, 1994 to 14th November, 2000, i.e. for the period this applicant was serving the erstwhile State of Bihar prior to bifurcation of the State, arrears of salary has been calculated and paid. For the period running from 15th November, 2000 to 31st August, 2005, i.e. for the period this applicant served the State of Jharkhand post bifurcation, arrears of salary is also calculated and amount legally payable is paid. The disputed period starts from 31st August, 2005. (III) It appears that just after August, 2005, the State of Jharkhand has passed an order not to take work from this applicant for any reason, whatsoever, including that she is not legally appointed. In connection with this aspect, the second writ petition, being W.P.(S) No. 3371 of 2006 was filed. This writ petition was allowed by this Court vide order dated 22nd July, 2013 against which the State has preferred L.P.A. No. 223 of 2014, which is still pending before this court. Further, for non-compliance of the order dated 22nd July, 2013, another contempt application, being Cont. Case (Civil) No. 339 of 2014 has also been instituted by this applicant, which is also pending before this court. Thus, there was a two fold direction contained in the order dated 11th April, 2007 passed in C.W.J.C. No.5813 of 1997(P), i.e. the respondents have been directed to pay the arrears of salary for the period the petitioner already served the State and further direction was that the respondents shall pay the petitioner till the time she continues in service and in compliance of the same, arrears of salary up to 31st August, 2005 was calculated and paid. Sofar as the post 31st August, 2005 period is concerned, the work is done by the applicant and therefore, the salary is to be paid, but this aspect of the matter is disputed as District Superintendent of Education Dumka vide memo no. 1383 dated 1.9.2005. (as per counter affidavit) has directed not to take work from the petitioner. Later on, in connection with the rejection order dated 19th July, 2005 on the applicant's preposition statement, another writ petition, being W.P.(S) No.3371 of 2006 was filed, which was allowed vide order dated 22nd July, 2013. For non-compliance of the said order, a contempt application, being Cont. Case (Civil) No. 339 of 2014 has already been filed and the State also has filed a Letters Patent Appeal, being L.P.A. No. 223 of 2014, challenging the order dated 22nd July, 2013. Both are pending at present.;