Puran Singh Bisht vs Ashok Kumar & Others

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J

This contempt petition has been filed alleging willful disobedience of the final order dated 18.12.2009 passed in Special Appeal No. 118 of 2008.

Operative portion of the said order is extracted below:-

“In view of the factual position noticed hereinabove, we are satisfied that the appellants having implemented the judgment in Umrao Singh

Rawat’s case (supra), and having acknowledged that the controversy raised in the instant special appeal is identical to the one rendered in Umrao

Singh Rawats case (supra), we are of the view that there is no justification whatsoever, at the hands of the appellants, to press the instant appeal.

Having implemented the judgment rendered by the High Court at Allahabad in Umrao Singh Rawats case (supra), the appellants are bound to

implement the judgment rendered in the writ petition filed by the respondents, which had been allowed by the High Court at Allahabad on 08.01.1998.

The instant special appeal is accordingly dismissed. The appellants are directed to implement the decision rendered by the learned Single Judge within

three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this orderâ€​

In this contempt petition, petitioner has alleged that opposite parties have willfully violated the order of this Court, inasmuch as, services of the

petitioner have not been regularized.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Special Appeal was decided four months after passing of dismissal order, therefore, the direction

issued by Division Bench to implement the judgment rendered by Allahabad High Court mandates the respondents to regularize services of the

petitioner and therefore, this is a case of willful disobedience of the order of this Court.

A response affidavit has been filed by Mr. Nitin Singh Bhadauria, Collector/District Magistrate, Almora. In para 14 of the said affidavit, it has been

stated that petitioner was dismissed from service after issuing charge-sheet. In para 11, it has further been stated that the petitioner had challenged the

said dismissal order in WPSS No. 920 of 2009, which was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to make representation to District Magistrate,

Almora. It has further been stated that petitioner’s representation, made to District Magistrate, was rejected vide order dated 20.08.2018.

Since, petitioner was dismissed from service by way of penalty and he unsuccessfully challenged the said dismissal order, therefore, the contention

made on behalf of the petitioner is without any substance that despite operation of the dismissal order, petitioner’s services were required to be

regularized, and non-regularisation of service amounts to contempt.

In such view of the matter, contempt petition is closed. Notices issued to the opposite parties are hereby discharged.