M.KARPAGA VINAYAGAM, C.J. - (1.) THE petitioners have filed this contempt application, praying for initiating the contempt proceedings as against the opposite parties for non -compliance of the order passed by this Court dated 5.4.2004.
(2.) (A). According to the petitioners, they were appointed in the year 1972 as L.D. Assistants. The promotion was given to the employees in U.D./Accounts Clerk as per existing vacancies. However, no promotion was given to the petitioners at the relevant time. They were already in Assistant Grade II when they were given Industrial Scale. Although computer staff were promoted after completion of 6 years of service, the petitioners were given promotion only after 8 years without monetary benefits. Therefore, they approached the High Court and filed writ petition. Ultimately the writ petition was allowed giving the following directions: (i) The petitioners have to be promoted to Input/ Output Clerk and consequently their seniority vis -a -vis Assistant Grade II has to be restored. (ii) The petitioners have to be given promotion with effect from the date when their Juniors as Accountant and Assistant Grade II were given promotion with subsequent consequences. (iii) The petitioner No. 3 Amanullah Khan's pay reduction in view of his option to retain the old pay is bad and his pay should not be reduced in terms of office order dated 28.9.1991. (B) In the view of the orders passed by this Court, petitioners approached the opposite parties with representations dated 10.9.2004 and 16.11.2004. (C) On 8.12.2004, the opposite parties issued an office order and distributed to all concerned to the effect that seniority are restored and granted promotion with effect from the date of promotion of their juniors. (D) The service records of the petitioners were placed before Pay Roll Section for preparation of dues, but the subsequent orders that have been passed giving the calculation of dues were not in accordance with the order passed by this Court. Since the calculation was not clear, petitioners made a representation on 8.8.2006 for supplying the copy of calculation, but no particulars of calculation have been given. Therefore, they have filed this contempt application. The case of the opposite parties in the show -cause is as follows : (A) Pursuant to the order dated 5.4.2004 passed by this Court, the seniority of the petitioners was restored and they were granted promotion with effect from the date of promotion of their juniors to Assistant Grade II with consequential benefits the office order dated 8.12.2004. In compliance to the said order, separate order has been passed on 8.12.2004 with reference to the pay scale of Shri Amanullah Khan. (B) After the issuance of these orders, in Office Order Nos. 104/2004 and 105/2004 in respect of the petitioners, the Pay Roll Section of the Finance Division/Headquarters was directed to calculate the dues payable to the petitioners and accordingly the Pay Roll Section calculated the amount payable to the petitioners and cheques were prepared. The petitioners were informed to collect the cheques from the office, but none of the petitioners turned up to receive the cheques. The seniority of the petitioners has already been restored with effect from 27.7.1979 in the scale of pay of Rs. 485 -803/ -; with effect from 13.9.1986 in the scale of pay of Rs. 973 -1607/ -; and with effect from 31.12.1993 in the scale of pay of Rs. 2500 -4300/ - respectively. Thus, the order of the High Court has been fully complied with. But despite the intimation regarding the preparation of cheques regarding the bills being kept ready, the petitioners did not incline to receive the consequential benefits. The petitioners are now creating dispute on the consequential benefits which is a fresh cause of action and which does not relate to the order passed by this Court earlier which is the subject -matter of this contempt application and as such no contempt is made out.
(3.) THE petitioners, in reply to the above said contentions in the show -cause, filed a rejoinder giving the details of the calculations in paragraphs 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the rejoinder.;