Patna High Court
Sundari DeviversusThe Union Of India
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
The High Court revived the contempt petition CCPA No. 20 of 2011 and ordered it to be listed before the CAT.
Summary
The petitioner, a widow, sought enforcement of a Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) order dated 9 November 2009 directing the railway authorities to calculate her late husband's service period from 13 July 1973 and adjust his pension accordingly. The railway respondents failed to comply, leading to a contempt petition (CCPA No. 20 of 2011) before the CAT, which was repeatedly dropped on the ground of the petitioner's counsel not appearing at hearings. The petitioner filed multiple revival petitions, the latest being M.A. No. 298 of 2022, but the contempt proceedings were again dismissed due to the same non‑appearance. The Patna High Court examined whether procedural defaults and the respondents' alleged compliance justified dropping the contempt petition. Finding that the petitioner was not at fault for the counsel's absence and that the respondents had not actually complied with the CAT order, the Court revived the contempt petition and directed it to be listed before the CAT on 17 February 2026. The writ petition was consequently disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether the contempt petition pending before the CAT can be revived despite previous dismissals due to the petitioner's counsel's non‑appearance.
- Whether the railway authorities' alleged compliance with the CAT order is sufficient to discharge the contempt proceedings.
- Whether procedural default of the petitioner's counsel can be condoned in the interest of justice.
Subjects
- contempt of court
- Central Administrative Tribunal
- pension calculation
- service period
- revival of proceedings
- procedural default
- railway employee
- writ petition
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.710 of 2026
======================================================
Sundari Devi wife of Late Kamleshwar Chaudhary, D/o Late Bundi
Chaudhary, Resident Of Village - Bela Birra, P.O. - Silkai, P.S.- Makhdumpur,
District- Jehanabad at present Chandrawansi Nagar, East Bhikhachak, P.S.-
Gardanibag, District and Town- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union Of India through the General Manager, East Central Railway,
Zonal Office, Hajipur, District- Vaishali, Bihar,
2. The General Manager, East Central Railway, Zonal Office, Hajipur, Bihar.
3. The Divisional Railway Manager, Divisional Office, East Central Railway,
Danapur Division, Patna, Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar, Adv.
For the UOI : Mr. Bindhyachal Rai, Sr. Panel Counsel
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH)
Date : 20-01-2026
The present writ petition has been filed against the order
dated 29.9.2022, passed in C.P. /20/2011 (Patna) in O.A./ 492/
2008 by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter
referred to as “the Ld. CAT”), Patna, whereby and whereunder
the contempt proceedings have been dropped.
2. The brief facts of the case, according to the petitioner are
that the husband of the petitioner was appointed as casual
worker on the post of Class-IV Employee on 17.9.1969 in the
Indian Railways at Bakhtiyarpur and subsequently, he
Patna High Court CWJC No.710 of 2026 dt.20-01-2026
2/7
superannuated on 30.6.2004 while holding the post of Box
Porter, Operating Department, Patna Junction, Patna. The
service period of the husband of the petitioner was calculated
from 7.2.1979 to 30.6.2004 for the purposes of pension,
however it was the claim of the husband of the petitioner that
his services should have been counted from 13.7.1973, hence he
had approached the Ld. CAT, by filing an application bearing
O.A. No. 492 of 2008, whereupon the Ld. CAT, vide order dated
9.11.2009 had directed the Respondents to calculate the service
period of the petitioner from 13.7.1973 and not from 7.2.1979
and consequently, re-fix his pension and pensionary benefits as
also pay admissible interest on the arrear amount of pension and
pensionary benefits with effect from 13.7.1973. The said order
dated 9.11.2009 was not complied with by the Respondents,
leading to the husband of the petitioner filing a contempt
petition before the Ld. CAT bearing CCPA No. 20 of 2011,
however in the meantime, the Respondents challenged the
aforesaid order dated 9.11.2009, passed by the Ld. CAT, before
this Court in CWJC No. 1196 of 2012, nonetheless the same
was dismissed as withdrawn, vide order dated 13.2.2012 with
liberty to file review petition, whereafter the Respondents had
filed review petition bearing R.A. No. 44 of 2013 and M.A. No.
Patna High Court CWJC No.710 of 2026 dt.20-01-2026
3/7
408 of 2013, however the same was also dismissed by the Ld.
CAT, vide order dated 5.12.2013. Thereafter, the Respondents
had filed yet another writ petition bearing CWJC No. 11473 of
2014. In the meantime the husband of the petitioner died on
4.5.2011, leading filing of a substitution petition bearing M.A.
No. 542 of 2012 but the same could not be pressed. The
contempt proceedings, during the interregnum period, was
dropped by the Ld. CAT, vide order dated 20.8.2015, subject to
the outcome of the aforesaid writ petition bearing CWJC No.
11473 of 2014, nonetheless liberty was granted to the employee
to revive the contempt petition in case of non-compliance of the
directions of the learned Tribunal. The petitioner had then filed a
revival petition on 11.5.2016, whereafter a substitution petition
bearing M.A. No. 364 of 2017 was filed, which was allowed
vide order dated 23.11.2017 and then though the aforesaid
contempt petition bearing CCPA No. 20 of 2011 was revived but
the proceedings were again dropped, vide order dated
13.12.2018.
3. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the
petitioner that even after lapse of several years, no action was
taken by the Respondents to comply with the aforesaid order
dated 9.11.2009, passed in O.A. No. 492 of 2008, nonetheless
Patna High Court CWJC No.710 of 2026 dt.20-01-2026
4/7
the contempt proceedings were dropped by an order dated
13.12.2018 on account of false contention of the Ld. Counsel
for the Respondents that the order passed by the Tribunal has
been complied with, however liberty was granted to the
applicant to take legal recourse, if any grievance is unsettled.
The order dated 13.12.2018 reads thus:-
“Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the
order passed by this Tribunal has already been
complied with.
Accordingly, the contempt petition is dropped. Notices
discharged.
However, liberty is granted to the applicant that if any
grievance is unsettled, it is open to him to take legal
recourse.”
4. Thereafter, the petitioner had again filed a revival petition
being M.A. No. 298 of 2022, which was heard on 20.5.2022 and
notices were directed to be issued to the contemnors /
respondents. The said contempt petition was then listed on
29.9.2022, however since the learned counsel for the petitioner
was not present during the course of hearing, on a false
submission by the Ld. Counsel for the Respondents that the
order has been complied with, the contempt proceeding has
again been dropped by the impugned order dated 29.9.2022.
5. The Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on
Patna High Court CWJC No.710 of 2026 dt.20-01-2026
5/7
account of default on the part of the concerned Advocate, the
petitioner should not be penalised, hence a sympathetic view be
taken and the aforesaid contempt proceeding be directed to be
revived.
6. We have gone through the materials on record and we
find from the order dated 13.12.2018, passed in CCPA No. 20 of
2011 that the counsel for the petitioner / her deceased husband
had not appeared before the Ld. CAT, however on the bald
submission of the learned counsel appearing for the
Respondents to the effect that the order of the learned Tribunal
has stood complied with, the contempt proceedings were
dropped, nonetheless liberty was granted to the applicant that in
case any grievance is unsettled, it would be open to take legal
recourse, leading to the petitioner having filed revival petition
on various occasions, lastly vide M.A. No. 298 of 2022, which
was heard on 20.5.2022 and notices were directed to be issued
to the contemnors / respondents, nonetheless again on account
of the non-appearance of the learned counsel for the petitioner,
on two occasions i.e. 31.8.2022 and 29.9.2022, though the
contempt petition had stood revived, the contempt proceedings
were dropped.
7. At this juncture, we have put a query to the learned
Patna High Court CWJC No.710 of 2026 dt.20-01-2026
6/7
counsel appearing for the Respondents as to whether any harm
would befall upon the respondents in case the contempt petition
is revived, to which the Ld. Counsel for the Respondents has
submitted that the respondents/ contemnors be granted liberty to
file their objections before the Ld. CAT, in case this Court
deems it fit and proper to revive the aforesaid contempt
proceedings.
8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case
and considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter as also taking
into account the fact that for no fault on the part of aged widow
lady (petitioner herein), her contempt petition has stood
dismissed on account of non-appearance of her counsel on
couple of occasions before the Ld. CAT, we are of the view that
it would be in the interest of justice and equitable to revive the
aforesaid contempt petition bearing CCPA No. 20 of 2011.
Accordingly, the said contempt petition bearing CCPA No. 20 of
2011 stands revived and restored to its original file, which is
directed to be listed before the Ld. CAT on 17.2.2026 at 10:30
am, on which date the learned counsel for the petitioner shall
definitely appear before the concerned Bench of the Ld. CAT,
however in the event of any default on his part to appear on any
one occasion, the same would not only entail disposal of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.710 of 2026 dt.20-01-2026
7/7
said contempt petition by the Ld. CAT on its own merit but
would also effectuate finality to the present litigation.
9. The present writ petition stands disposed off on the
aforesaid terms.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
( Praveen Kumar, J)
Ajay/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 5.2.2026
Transmission Date NA
Checking your session…