Judgment:
K.S. Gupta, J.
(1) This petition under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India and Section 151 Cpc has been filed on the allegations that by an order dated September 27, 1990 passed by the Division Bench of this Court Dda was directed to communicate to the petitioner within four weeks from the date of the order, the extent of the unearned increase payable by the petitioner to the DDA. The respondents have flouted the said order by not communicating the extent of the unearned increase to the petitioner within the stipulated time and even thereafter for a further period of more than six months. It is stated that recently when the petitioner's representative conveyed resentment about the disrespectful attitude towards the aforesaid order respondent No. 1 issued a letter dated May 15, 1991 calling upon the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs. 1,48,903.00 towards 50% unearned increase. The amount of unearned increase could at the maximum be Rs. 35,000.00 . It was prayed that proceedings under the Contempt of Court Act be initiated against the respondents for flouting the aforesaid order dated September 27, 1990.
(2) In response to the show-cause notice, respondents have filed reply on the counter-affidavit of N. Balachandran, Director (CL), DDA. It is averred that the present petition against two officers is not maintainable without Dda being imp leaded as a party. Delay in communicating the extent of unearned increase to the petitioner was mainly on account of three factors, namely, the time taken in obtaining the certified copy of the order dated September 27,1990, the examination of the question of preferring an Special Leave Petition against that order before the Supreme Court and also the fact that the calculation of unearned increase was in itself a time consuming process. For those reasons, Dda by the letter dated May 15,1991 communicated the amount of unearned increase payable by the petitioner to be Rs. 1,48,903.00 being 50% amount which the petitioner was required to pay besides interest on that amount w.e.f. January 21,1987 till the date of payment. Petitioner had no intention of making the requisite payment and, thereforee, a petition was filed on behalf of the petitioner wherein time for making the deposit of the amount was extended by the order dated June 21, 1991 and still no deposit has been made so far. Instead the quantification of the amount of the unearned increase is challenged by the petitioner by filing Cwp 2000/91. It is emphatically denied that the respondents are in any manner guilty of having committed contempt of the Court. The underlying object of this petition is to compel the Dda to scale down the amount of unearned increase payable by the petitioner. We have heard the learned Counsels for both the parties.
(3) Cwp 2000/91, Link Engineers Pvt. Ltd. v. Dda and Others, has been disposed of today with the direction that on payment being made by the petitioner Company of Rs. 99,268.56 plus interest thereon @ 18% p.a. w.e.f. April 23, 1993 within a month from today, respondents will grant permission for transfer of shed No. A-10, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-11, New Delhi in favor of the petitioner Company within two months thereafter. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, we are satisfied that the delay in communicating the amount of the unearned increase payable by the petitioner to the Dda as per the aforesaid order dated September 27,1990 was mainly because of the reasons disclosed in the reply by the respondents and they did not have the intention to flout the said order. Petition is, thereforee, dismissed being without merit, without any orders as to cost.