Satyanand vs D.P. Bengalia

Ajay Mohan Goel, J

This Contempt Petition has been filed by the petitioner, feeling aggrieved by the fact of purported non­ compliance of the directions, which stood issued by the learned erstwhile State Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No.3786 of 2015, dated 31.03.2016, titled as Satyanand Versus The State of H.P. & another.

The Original Application stood disposed of by the learned Tribunal in the following terms:­

"Consequently, office order Annexure P­1, dated 20.8.2015, is quashed and set aside and the respondents are directed to consider the case of the applicant for conferment of work charge status on completion of 8 years service with all consequential benefits".

A perusal of the reply filed by the respondent demonstrates that the case of the petitioner was re­considered by the Competent Authority and order stood passed by it on 10.06.2016 itself in terms of the directions which stood issued by the learned Tribunal.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the order passed by the learned Tribunal as well as the reply of the respondent, in my considered view, the petitioner cannot allege that there is a willful breach of the directions passed by the learned Tribunal. The directions which stood passed by the learned Tribunal were inter alia to consider the case of the applicant for conferment of work charge status on completion of eight years service with all consequential benefits. In compliance thereof, while considering the case of the petitioner, the Competent Authority, for the reasons assigned in order dated 10.06.2016, has come to the conclusion that work charge status cannot be conferred upon the applicant in the absence of work charge establishment. If petitioner feels aggrieved by the order, which stands passed by the learned Tribunal, then he can assail the same before the appropriate Forum. However, in view of the fact that order stood passed by the Competent Authority in terms of the directions passed by the learned Tribunal, no contempt is made out.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that he may be permitted to withdraw this Contempt Petition, with liberty to assail order dated 10.06.2016, passed by the Competent Authority, before the appropriate Court.

Petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty, as prayed for. Notice stands discharged. Pending Miscellaneous applications, if any, also disposed of.