Darshan Singh & Anr vs Mansi Sahay & Anr

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J

The instant petition has been filed for initiating contempt proceedings against the respondents for willfully and intentionally disobeying and disregarding the directions passed by this Court on 17.10.2019 in CWP No. 2930 of 2019.

Aggrieved by the allotment of work of distribution of LPG Cylinders to Kishore Kumar and Dalip Kumar (not arrayed as parties), has filed the instant petition for the grant of following reliefs:-

(i) That the present petitioners be allowed to continue with distribution work of cooking gas cylinders in Chirgaon and Rohru, District Shimla, H.P. and the respondents be directed to release the payments, due and admissible to the petitioners, the bills of which have been wrongly issued in the name of the private respondents.

(ii) That the proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, may kindly be initiated against the respondents and strict action be taken against the respondents/contemnors for willfully disobeying the orders passed by this Hon'ble Court.

On 17.10.2019, this Court in CWP No. 2930 of 2019 passed the following orders:-

"CMP No. 11091 of 2019

Allowed and disposed of.

CWP No. 2930 of 2019 & CMP No. 11092 of 2019

Notice. Mr. J. K. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General and Ms. Ruchi Kumari, Advocate, accept notice for respondent No. 1 and respondents No. 2 and 3, respectively. Issue notice to respondent No. 4 returnable on 13th November, 2019, on taking steps within two days. In the meanwhile, status quo qua distribution of the gas cylinders in Rohru and Chirgaon, as on today, shall be maintained."

According to the petitioners, the respondents disobeyed the order by allotting the work in favour of aforesaid two persons despite the status quo order, whereas the stand of the respondents is that the work in question already stood allotted to the aforesaid persons on 06.10.2019 i.e. much prior to the passing of the order dated 17.10.2019. The submissions of the respondents are duly fortified and supported by a number of documents annexed alongwith the reply, which prima facie establish that on the date of passing of the order of status quo on 17.10.2019, the work already stood allotted in favour of the aforesaid two persons.

Therefore, in the given circumstances, respondents cannot be said to have violated the status quo order of this Court. Consequently, we find no merit in this petition and the same is accordingly dismissed.