In Brief
A widow of a deceased college employee sought contempt proceedings after the university failed to fully comply with an earlier Supreme Court order directing absorption and retiral benefits. The employee had died in 2012, but was later absorbed with effect from 1990. The Court held the employee should be treated as absorbed from 1990, with service counted notionally for benefits purposes. Rather than resolve disputed facts in the contempt petition itself, the Court directed the university's Registrar/Vice Chancellor to conduct a fresh, reasoned enquiry into salary, arrears, and family pension entitlements with proper opportunity for all parties, to be completed within specified timeframes.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.