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
6 paragraphs · 223 wordsAjay Mohan Goel, J
By way of this petition, the petitioner has alleged willful disobedience of the directions passed by the learned Erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, in O.A. No.5995 of 2017, dated 15.11.2017, titled as Jeewan Lal Versus State of H.P. and others, which matter stood disposed of by the learned Tribunal in the following terms:
"In the facts and circumstances of the case, the original application is disposed of with a direction that the applicant may file a supplementary representation alongwith a certified copy of this order for transfer against a station of this choice out of at least five such stations to be indicated in the representation before 2nd respondent within five days. 2nd respondent shall decide the same after affording an opportunity of being heard to the applicant, if so desired, by 15.12.2017".
A perusal of the reply filed by the respondent demonstrates that in terms of the order passed by the learned Tribunal, the Competent Authority did pass an order on 11.01.2008, which is appended with reply in Annexure R1.
Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that present petition has been rendered infructuous.
In view of the submissions, so made by learned counsel for the petitioner, these contempt proceedings are closed. Notice stands discharged. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.