Jia Lal vs Manisha Nanda

Sandeep Sharma, J

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 intentionally and deliberately disobeyed the order/judgment dated 15.12.2017 passed by the erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal, Shimla in OA No. 3475 of 2015, titled as Jia Lal versus State of H.P,.and others, whereby learned Tribunal below while allowing the original application, held that the petitioner shall be deemed to be in continuous service w.e.f. 2.5.1994 to 31.8.1994 and directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for conferment of work charge status on completion of 10 years service.

Having heard learned counsel representing the parties and perused the reply filed at the behest of the respondent, this Court finds that only plausible explanation in the reply for non­implementation of order/judgment alleged to have been violated, is that the respondent­State has filed Civil Writ Petition before this Court, laying therein challenge to aforesaid order/judgment alleged to have been violated, but it has been categorically stated in para­3 of the reply filed by the respondent that till date no stay has been granted against the order/judgment alleged to have been violated and as such, this Court sees no reason for the respondents to not to comply with the order/judgment, alleged to have been violated. Faced with aforesaid situation, learned Additional Advocate General fairly states that order/judgment alleged to have been violated, if not implemented till date, shall be implemented positively within a period of four weeks, subject to out come of the Civil Writ Petition.

Consequently, in view of the fair statement made by learned Additional Advocate General, this Court sees no reason to keep the present petition alive and as such, same is accordingly disposed of with the direction to the respondent to do the needful within a period of four weeks, if not already done, failing which, he would further aggravate the contempt. Petitioner is at liberty to get the present proceedings revived in case aforesaid order/judgment is not complied with, so that appropriate action, in accordance with law is taken against erring official. Notices issued to the respondent is hereby discharged accordingly.