2026:CGHC:24566 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONT No. 851 of 2024 1 - Rakesh Verma S/o Shri Uma Kishore Verma Aged About 67 Years R/o Opp, Uphar Bhawan, Near Hanuman Mandir, Ward Number 44, New Sarkanda, Jabdapara Bilaspur, Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - Amit Kumar Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur, Near Nehru Chowk, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 - Jai Prakash Sahu Dy. Director, Pension, Urban Administrative Department, Atal Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Umesh Borkar Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner Regional Provident Fund Office, Block-D, Scheme 32, Indira Gandhi Commercial Complex Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. KPS Gandhi, Advocate For respective respondents :Mr. Sunil Pillai, Advocate, Mr. Pritendra Chauhan, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Ashutosh Trivedi, Advocate and Mr. Shikhar Shukla, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 18.06.2026 1. Heard. 2. In WPS No.1795 of 2018 dated 12.02.2024 following order was passed : “14. In the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the above referred decisions and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deem it appropriate to direct the respondent authorities to pay whole amount of pension and gratuity to the petitioner with simple interest at the rate 6% per annum on the unpaid amount of pension and gratuity from the date it has fallen due.” 3. This contempt petition has been filed on account of non-compliance of -2- said order. 4. Respondent No.3 vide order dated 08.11.2024 was directed to file affidavit as to what was the opening balance of the applicant with the EPF organization in the month of April, 2010 and when the petitioner withdrew the amount from such account. 5. Pursuant to order dated 08.11.2024, affidavit was filed by respondent No.3 on 03.12.2024. Respondent No.3 has depicted the opening balance and the amount withdrawn by the petitioner through a chart. The petitioner herein has not disputed the facts enumerated in the chart. 6. It appears that order passed in WPS No.1795 of 2018 has already been complied with and therefore, this contempt petition is disposed of. However, the petitoner would be at liberty to file a fresh writ petition, if amount of pension has not been calculated properly. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha