Kuldeep Chand vs Dr. G.S. Goraya

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 willfully and intentionally disobeyed the directions contained in judgment dated 10.1.2018, passed by the Erstwhile HP State Administrative Tribunal in OA (D) No. 49 of 2017, whereby the Tribunal below while allowing the OA filed by the petitioner, quashed the office order dated 28.6.2016 qua notional promotion and communication dated 19.8.2016 qua rejection of arrears and held the petitioner entitled to salary and allowances of Senior Assistant w.e.f. 9.10.2002 to 29.6.2016 with further direction to the respondents to work out the arrears of salary and allowances within a period of two 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 respondent pursuant to aforesaid direction issued by the Tribunal, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings.

In the reply filed by the respondent, no plausible explanation has been rendered on record for not implementing the judgment alleged to have been violated save and except that respondent State has filed writ petition bearing CWP No. 57 of 2019, before this Court, laying herein challenge to judgment rendered by the Tribunal.

Learned Additional Advocate General while admitting factum with regard to pendency of the aforesaid petition before this Court fairly admits that no stay has been granted by the Division Bench of this Court in the writ petition. Since there is no stay, if any, against the judgment alleged to have been violated, this Court sees no reason for the respondent to not to comply with the directions contained in the judgment alleged to have been violated. Faced with aforesaid situation, learned Additional Advocate General submits that judgment, if not already implemented, shall be positively implemented within a period of six weeks, subject to the outcome of the CWP.

Consequently, in view of the above statement made by the learned Additional Advocate General, this Court sees no reason to keep alive the present petition and accordingly, same is closed with direction to the respondent to do the needful, if not already done, within a period of four 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.