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
4 paragraphs · 324 wordsSandeep Sharma, J
1.By way of present contempt petition, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent for having willfully and intentionally disobeyed the directions contained in order/judgment dated 14.12.2015, passed by the Erstwhile HP State Administrative Tribunal in OA No. 4798 of 2015, whereby the Tribunal below having taken note of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that his case is squarely covered by the order/judgment dated 31.5.2012, rendered by this Court in CWP No. 4687 of 2009, Ashok Sharma v. Union of India and connected matters., disposed of the OA with direction to the respondents to consider the case of the applicant strictly in light of aforesaid order/judgment rendered by this Court within a period of four months from the date of production of certified copy of the order. Since no action, whatsoever, came to be taken at the behest of the respondents pursuant to aforesaid direction issued by the Tribunal, petitioners have approached this Court in the instant proceedings.
2. Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, learned Additional Advocate General, representing the respondent, submits that though he has every reason to presume that by now, judgment alleged to have been violated must have been complied with in its totality, but if not, same would be definitely complied with within a period of three weeks fromtoday.
Consequently, in view of the fair stand adopted by the learned Additional Advocate General, this Court sees no reason to keep the present petition alive and accordingly, same is closed. However, respondent-contemnor is directed to do the needful in terms of order/judgment alleged to have been violated within a period of three weeks, failing which respondent would aggravate the contempt and petitioner would be at liberty to get the present petition revived so that appropriate action in accordance with law is taken against the respondent-contemnor. Notice issued to respondent is discharged at this stage.
