Lekh Raj vs P. Mitra And Ors

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 respondents for having willfully and intentionally disobeyed the directions contained in order dated 1.9.2015 passed by the Erstwhile HP State Administrative Tribunal in OA No. 2948 of 2015, whereby the Tribunal below while directing respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to have relook on the entire matter in terms of instructions dated 12.12.2011, also directed to keep the selection of respondent No.4 Sh Ajay Kumar, in abeyance. Since despite there being aforesaid direction issued by the Tribunal, respondents permitted private respondent No.4 to go for training pursuant to his selection, petitioner approached the court in the instant proceedings for initiation of competent proceedings.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused pleadings adduced on record by the respective parties, especially reply of respondent No.2, this court finds that factum with regard to passing of the order dated 1.9.2015, alleged to have been violated, came to the notice to the Director General of Police on 14/15.9.2015, by which time, respondent No.2 was already sent for training at PTC, Daroh, w.e.f. 1.9.2015. Director General of Police has stated in his reply that since training has already commenced and respondent No.4 has been sent to the training under bonafide belief, his recalling at this stage would create administrative problems as the result of all the districts will have to be revised. In para 6 of the reply, it has been stated that in case OA is allowed, respondent No.4 shall be called back and consequent action shall be taken as per final judgment delivered by this court of law.

Having taken note of the explanation rendered in the reply filed by the Director General of Police, there appears to be no justification to continue with the instant proceedings and accordingly, same are closed. Notices discharged. However, it is clarified that in case petition having been filed by the petitioner is ultimately allowed, respondent No.4 shall not claim any equity on account of his being sent to training despite there being restraint order issued by the Tribunal.