CourtKutchehry.com
Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench

Avinash Kumar And Ors vs Union Of India And Ors

Central Administrative Tribunal · Decided on 12 April 2018 · Citation: (2018) 04 CAT CK 0026

HON’BLE JUDGES
V. Ajay Kumar, J · Nita Chowdhury, Member (A)
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Contempt Petition No. 221 Of 2018, Original Application No. 3447 Of 2017
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 380 words

V. Ajay Kumar, J

1.

OA No.3447/2017 filed by the petitioners was disposed of by this Tribunal on 28.09.2017 (Annexure CP-I), as under:-

"4. In these circumstances and in view of grant of the same relief to the identical persons, this OA is disposed of without going into other merits of the case, by directing the respondents to consider the Annexure A-1 (colly) representation dated 17.07.2017 of the applicants keeping in view the various judgments attached alongwith the OA and to pass an appropriate reasoned and speaking order thereon within 90 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. No costs".

2.

Alleging non-implementation of the aforesaid orders, the petitioners filed the present CP No.221/2018.

3.

It is seen from the CP record that the respondents, in compliance of the orders of this Tribunal in OA, have passed a Speaking Order on 14.11.2017 (Annexure CP-2) and rejected the claim of the petitioners by giving certain reasons.

4.

Shri Amit Anand, the learned counsel for the petitioners while not disputing the fact of passing of the Speaking Order on 14.11.2017 by the respondents, however, submits that since the reasons given therein are illegal, arbitrary and against to the facts and settled principles of law and of various decisions of this Tribunal, the same amount to contempt of the orders of this Tribunal and accordingly prays for punishing the respondents-contemnors.

5.

A perusal of the orders of this Tribunal in OA clearly indicates that the OA was disposed of summarily at the admission stage without hearing the other side and without giving any opportunity to them to file any counter. The only direction given by the respondents was to consider the representation of the petitioners in view of the various judgments attached with the OA, i.e. what the respondents actually did. Hence, we are satisfied that the respondents have complied with the orders of this Tribunal.

6.

In the circumstances and in view of the substantial compliance of the orders of this Tribunal by the respondents, we do not find any merit in the CP and accordingly the same is dismissed. However, the petitioners are at liberty to question the orders now passed by the respondents, if they are so advised, in accordance with law. No costs.