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
17 paragraphs · 327 wordsSandeep Sharma, J
By way of present Contempt Petition, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioners for initiation of contempt proceedings against the
respondents for having intentionally and deliberately disobeyed the judgment/order dated 14.6.2019, passed by erstwhile H.P. State Administrative
Tribunal, Shimla in OA(M) No.250 of 2016, titled as Mohinder Saini and others versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others.
Careful perusal of aforesaid judgment, alleged to have been violated, (Annexure C-1), reveals that learned Tribunal below while disposing of the
original application, directed the respondents to consider the case of the applicants/petitioners for promotion to the posts of Head Constables in terms
of the standing order dated 29.5.2003, within two months from the date of production of certified copy of the order. Since no action, if any, ever came
to be taken at the behest of the respondents pursuant to the aforesaid direction issued by the Tribunal, applicants/ petitioners have approached this
Court in the instant proceedings.
Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, learned Additional Advocate General representing the respondents while accepting notice on behalf of the respondents
states that though he has every reason to believe and presume that by now aforesaid judgment alleged to have been violated, must have been complied
with, but if not, same would be complied with within a period of two weeks from today.
Consequently, in view of the fair statement made by learned Additional Advocate General representing the respondents, this Court sees no reason
to keep the present petition alive and as such, same is accordingly disposed of with the direction to the respondents to do the needful within a period of
two weeks, if not already done, failing which, they would further aggravate the contempt. Petitioners are at liberty to get the present proceedings
revived in case aforesaid judgment is not complied with, so that appropriate action, in accordance with law is taken against erring official. Notices
issued to the respondents are hereby discharged accordingly.