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
16 paragraphs · 358 wordsSandeep Sharma, J
By way of present petition filed under Ss. 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act read with Art. 215 of the Constitution of India, prayer has been
made on behalf of the petitioner to initiate contempt proceedings against the respondents for willful and deliberate disobedience of order dated
8.5.2018 passed by erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in OA No. 2040 of 2018, titled Neem Dutt vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
and others, whereby learned Tribunal below having taken note of the statement made by learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner that the case of
petitioner is squarely covered by judgment dated 6.3.2013 rendered by this Court in CWP No. 6167 of 2012, Sukru Ram vs. The State of Himachal
Pradesh and others, disposed of the Original Application with a direction to the respondents to extend benefit of aforesaid judgment to the petitioner, if
on verification he is found to be similarly situate person, within three months from the date of production of a certified copy of the order. Since no
action, whatsoever, came to be taken by the respondents in pursuance to order passed by erstwhile Tribunal, petitioner has approached this Court in
the instant proceedings, praying therein to take appropriate action against the respondents, in accordance with law.
Learned Additional Advocate General fairly states that though he has every reason to believe that by now order in question must have been
complied with by the respondent, but if not, same would be complied within a period of two weeks from today.
Having taken note of the fair stand adopted by learned Additional Advocate General, this Court sees no reason to keep the present proceedings
alive and same are closed with a direction to the respondents to do the needful, if not already done, in terms of order in question, within a period of two
weeks from today. Needless to say, petitioner shall be at liberty to get the contempt petition revived, in case, respondents fail to comply with the order
in question, so that appropriate action is taken against the erring officials. Notices issued to the respondents are discharged.