TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1988 (3) TMI 465
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the Pension Paying Office, Pokhara in Nepal asking for a direction to the Union of India to make the services of the petitioners permanent and for further directions in the matter of payment of allowances and other material benefits as payable to similar employees under the Union Government. Notice was ordered on the application on 14th July, 1987, and two weeks' time was allowed to the respondents for filing their counter affidavit. On 3rd August, 1987, the court directed as follows: Two weeks are allowed to the respondents for filing a counter affidavit. No further time will be allowed. One week thereafter is allowed for filing rejoiner. Put up this matter after three weeks. Meanwhile, status....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in return. 3. The Indian Embassy for Nepal is located at Kathmandu. The Pension Paying Office is maintained at some distance at a place called Pokhara. It is the common case of the parties that the necessity to maintain such an office is linked up with the historical fact that several inhabitants of Nepal worked in the Indian Army under the Gorkha Regiment. Mainly for their convenience this extra territorial establishment is being maintained. Some of the petitioners are India-based while others are residents of Nepal. The establishment at Pokhara is under the direct control of an Officer attached to the Indian Embassy styled as Officer-in-Charge, Indian Embassy, Pension Paying Office, Pokhara. The ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ber 6, 1987, and ensured immediate compliance with Court's directions. Both these Secretaries to the Government have tendered unconditional apology. The third respondent is the Controller of Defence Accounts, Central Command, Meerut. He has taken the stand that petitioner No. 9, Shri C.N. Dubey, is not an employee of the establishment of the Controller of Defence Accounts at Meerut nor is he an employee under his administrative control. According to him, he has no concern with any executive or administrative matter relating to the Pension Paying Office at Pokhara. Respondent No. 4, the Ambassador, was not subjected to the contempt proceedings. Respondent No. 5 is the Military and Air Attache of the Indian Embassy at ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r security reasons. It is further stated that we had no intention to flout or disobey the orders of this Hon'ble Court but for the reasons beyond our control, the same could not be implemented notwithstanding the fact that we had all intentions to implement the same in the right earnest. The orders have since been implemented, the petitioner has since been reinstated and also given accommodation. The delay in implementing the same may kindly be condoned and we be excused for such delay for which we have tendered an unconditional apology at the outset of this affidavit. 6. There is some material which, if probed into further, might have established that respondent No. 6 had the notice of the order of this Court before physical di....