S.K. Mahajan, J.
1. Despite the case having been passed over once, no one is appearing on behalf of the petitioner.
2. By judgment dated 16th August, 1996 while disposing of the writ petition, the Court respondent No. 4 not to treat the petitioner under suspension on and from 25th July, 1994 and as a consequent thereto further direction was given to pay all consequential benefits to the petitioner as regards pay and allowances subject, of course, to the petitioner satisfying respondent No. 4 during that period he was not gainfully employed. The payment was not made by respondents to the petitioner which resulted in the petitioner filing the present petition for initiating proceedings for contempt against the respondents.
3. The case of the respondents in reply is that in terms of undated letter received by the respondents on 10th September, 1996 the petitioner has himself admitted that he was helping his wife with tuitions from September, 1994 onwards and at the relevant time there was about six students to whom he was teaching. Nothing is stated in this letter as to what was the amount of tuition fee being received by him from the students. It is also alleged in the reply by the respondents that the petitioner was acting as a Life Insurance Corporation agent with number 62278-111. Certain policies of insurance have also been mentioned in the reply which were taken by the insured from the Insurance Company in respect of which petitioner had acted as agent. The petitioner in his rejoinder affidavit has not denied that he was working as an insurance agent and that he was undertaking tuitions as well. Since the condition precedent for the grant of pay and allowances that the petitioner should not be gainfully employed was not satisfied by him, in my view, there is no deliberate or willful violation of the order of the Court by the respondents.
4. There are no merits in the present petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed with no order as to costs.
5. Petition dismissed.