Irshad Ahmed Khan vs Manoj Kumar Dwivedi Commr Secy to GAD

Javed Iqbal Wani, J

Upon coming up this contempt petition for consideration, the counsel for the contemnors/respondents being Commissioner/Secretary to Government Administration Department and Commissioner/Secretary to Transport Department stated at bar that the Managing Director, J&K RTC has been specifically instructed to comply with the judgment dated 02.12.2015 by offering appointment on compassionate ground to the petitioner.

Mrs. Monika Kohli and Mr. Rajesh Thapa appearing counsel for the said respondents produced two communications No. TRPT-MVDOLEG/17/2022-02 dated 16.12.2024 and TRPT MVDOleg/17/2022-02 dated 26.12.2024, which communications are taken on record, reveal that the Managing Director, J&K RTC Jammu stands instructed to implement the judgment and to file compliance report accordingly on behalf of the respondents.

The counsel for the Managing Director, namely Anjeet Kour, at this stage produced a copy of order bearing No. JKRTC/GMA/PS/J/330 dated 03.01.2025 issued by the Managing Director JKKRTC, which order reads as under:

“In pursuance to the Hon’ble High Court directions, sanction is hereby accorded to the appointment of Sh. Irshad Ahmad Khan S/o Late Shri Mohd Yaqoob R/o 249, Talab Khatikan, Jammu under SRO -43 category in JKRTC on Consolidated remuneration of Rs. 1500/- (Rupees One thousand five hundred only) per month subject to confirmation of JKRTC Board of Directors.

A copy of the aforesaid order came to be also furnished to the counsel for the petitioner.

Perusal of the aforesaid order would reveal that sanction has been accorded to the appointment of the petitioner under SRO 43 in the Corporation on consolidated remuneration of Rs. 1500/- per month, subject to the confirmation by Board of Directors of the Corporation.

Mr. Rahul Pant, senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, however, would submit that the order of appointment of the petitioner dated 03.01.2025 is not in any case the compliance of the judgment, whereunder the instant contempt petition has arisen. Mr. Pant would submit that the petitioner may join the Corporation pursuant to the order of appointment dated 03.01.2025, however, would reserve a right for seeking said appointment retrospectively on substantive basis and joining of the petitioner pursuant to order dated 03.01.2025 shall not operate as a bar in this regard.

Having regard to the aforesaid position obtaining in the matter, inasmuch as, the submission of Mr. Pant, it is deemed appropriate to close the instant contempt proceedings and to provide aforesaid liberty to the petitioner as sought by his counsel.

Accordingly, contempt proceedings are closed with the aforesaid liberty to the petitioner.

In view of the closing of the proceedings in the instant petition, the ROBKAR framed against the respondents/contemnors by this court in terms of order dated 30.12.2024 shall stand recalled and closed.