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
7 paragraphs · 224 wordsS. Datta Purkayastha, J
Heard learned counsel of both sides.
Learned counsel, Mr. K. Nath appearing for the petitioner submits that as per the order, passed by this Court on 23.07.2024 in WP(C) No.972 of 2022, a direction was given to the respondents to re-examine the matter of promotion of the petitioner keeping in view of the roster points and it was also observed that if the petitioner was found entitled to be considered for promotion to the post of UDC on the basis of roster points, then the respondents would promote the petitioner to post of UDC by creating supernumerary post without disturbing the private respondent no.4 who is already promoted.
Thereafter, this contempt petition was filed alleging deliberate violation of said order by the respondents.
Learned counsel, Mr. Nath submits that now the respondents have considered the case of the petitioner and ultimately denied him to give promotion on the ground of eligibility and in this circumstance, the petitioner intends to submit a fresh writ petition.
Mr. Nath, learned counsel prays for allowing the petitioner to withdraw from the instant contempt petition with a liberty to file a fresh writ petition on the said cause of action.
Considering the aforesaid submissions, the instant contempt petition is accordingly disposed of, being withdrawn, with a liberty to the petitioner to file fresh writ petition.