Jeet Singh vs Kumud Singh

Sandeep Sharma, J

By way of present petition filed under S. 17 of the Administrative Tribunals Act read with Ss. 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and Art. 215 of the Constitution of India, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner to initiate contempt proceedings against the respondent for willful and deliberate disobedience of order dated 17.5.2017 passed by erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in OA No. 1807 of 2017, titled Jeet Singh vs. Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited and others, whereby learned Tribunal below having taken note of the statement made by learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner that the case of petitioner is squarely covered by judgment rendered in Mool Raj Upadhyaya vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, 1994 Supp (2) SCC 316, disposed of the Original Application with a direction to the respondents/competent Authority to extend benefit of aforesaid judgments to the petitioner, if on verification he is found to be similarly situate person, within three months from the date of production of a certified copy of the order. Since no action, whatsoever, came to be taken by the respondent in pursuance to order passed by erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein to take appropriate action against the respondent, in accordance with law.

Perusal of Annexure RA, annexed with the reply filed by the respondent, shows that the case of the petitioner stands duly considered by the respondent vide order dated 14. 5.2018, whereby it has been observed that the case of the petitioner has been considered for conferment of work charge status with effect from 24.1.1998 after revival of work charge establishment in the Board. Hence, this Court is satisfied that the order in question stands duly complied with and no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping the present proceedings alive.

In view of aforesaid, present proceedings are closed. Notice issued to the respondent is discharged. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate court of law, qua his surviving grievances, if any.