Pyare Lal vs Yunis

Sandeep Sharma, J

1.By way of present petition filed under S. 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner to initiate contempt proceedings against the respondent for willful and deliberate disobedience of order dated 1.5.2019 passed by erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in OA No. 1600 of 2019, titled Pyare Lal vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation and another 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 17.7.2014 rendered by this Court in CWP No. 3050/2014, Nek Ram vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, disposed of the Original Application with a direction to the respondent/competent Authority to extend benefit of aforesaid judgments 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 order. Since no action, whatsoever, came to be taken by the respondent in pursuance to order passed by erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein to take appropriate action against the respondent, in accordance with law.

Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent 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 three weeks from today.

Having taken note of the fair stand adopted by learned Counsel appearing for the respondent, this Court sees no reason to keep the present proceedings alive and same are closed with a direction to the respondent to do the needful, if not already done, in terms of order in question, within a period of three weeks from today. Needless to say, petitioner shall be at liberty to get the contempt petition revived, in case, respondent fails to comply with the order in question, so that appropriate action is taken against the erring officials. Notice issued to the respondent is discharged.