Randhir Singh vs V.S.Chaudhari, Labour Commissioner Haryana and ors.

D.S. Tewatia, J.

Petitioner''s services were terminated with effect from 14th September, 1982. Before this order could be served upon, the respondents were made aware by the petitioner as also (sic) counsel about the staying of the termination of the services of the petitioner by the High Court by order dated 13th September, 1982. Despite the knowledge of the order staying the termination of the services of the petitioner, the petitioner was relieved of his post on 1st October, 1982 by order Annexure P. 8. The petitioner has moved this court to punish the respondents of disobedience of the order of this court as the said act amounted to contempt of Court under section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act.

The stand taken on behalf of the respondents is that the respondents were under the impression that the order passed on 14th September, 1982, became effective on that very day and on that date they had no information that the termination of the services of the petitioner was stayed.

While there is no merit in the stand taken on behalf of the respondents, nevertheless it cannot be said that they could not have genuinely taken the view that they had taken and therefore, it cannot be said that there had been deliberate attempt on their part to disobey the orders of this Court.

Mr. Batra, appearing for the respondents, has stated that the petitioner shall be allowed in service and will be permitted to continue in services as if he had never been relieved or his post till such time the stay order passed by the High Court is operative and that the petitioner shall be allowed to resume duty on Monday the l3th December, 1982, at the place from where he was relieved.

In view of this, Mr. Sudershen Goel, does not press the petition and the same is dismissed as withdrawn and the rule is discharged.