Ved Parkash vs Sourabh Bhagat And Ors

Non-compliance of the order passed by this Court on 27.09.2017 in LPASW No. 99/2017 is alleged in the present petition. The operative part of the order reads as under:

"In view of the aforesaid analysis, the appeal preferred by appellant is accepted. The order impugned dated 29.03.2017 is set aside. The respondents are directed to accord consideration to the case of appellant for regularization with effect from 01.04.2003 i.e. the Financial year following the year in which the appellant completed 07 years continuous service. It is further made clear that in case on the date of his initial engagement as daily wager i.e. 25.11.1995, if the appellant had crossed the maximum age prescribed for employment in the Government service, the respondent No. 1 being the administrative department shall consider the case of the appellant for age relaxation. It is further made clear that the consideration to be accorded to the appellant would be in line with and in the light of observation made herein above. Needless to say that the appellant, upon his regularization with effect from 01.04.2003 shall also be entitled to all consequential benefits. The matter is very old and the consideration as directed cannot brook any further delay. Respondents, therefore, shall do the needful as directed above within a period of 06 week from the date, a certified copy of this order is made available to the respondents. The appeal is accordingly allowed in the above terms."

The present Contempt Petition was filed in this Court on 23.01.2018.

Though this Court had granted six weeks time for compliance of the order. Order was not complied, despite seeking number of adjournments and directing personal presence of the Commissioner Secretary of the Department concerned. On 17.05.2019, this Court was compelled to pass the following order:

"Grievance raised by the petitioner in the present contempt petition is that the order passed by this Court on 27.09.2017 has not been complied with till date.

The direction was for compliance thereof within six weeks' from the date certified copy was made available to the respondents.

The present Contempt Petition was filed on 23.01.2018.

Despite number of opportunities granted, including last and summoning of the Commissioner Secretary in person in the Court, the order has not been complied with till date.

On 29.01.2019 Advocate General sought last opportunity to comply with the order within two weeks. Case was adjourned to 20.02.2019. Till date the order has not been complied with.

Learned counsel for the respondents has sought more time.

Adjourned to 27.05.2019.

It is made clear that in case order is not complied with before the next date of hearing, the respondents shall be heard only on the issue of punishment for non-compliance of order passed by this court, as prima facie contempt has been committed."

Fresh compliance report has been filed and the order dated 24.05.2019 has been annexed therewith. In terms of this order, the petitioner has been granted relaxation of age and his services have been regularized w.e.f. 01.04.2003. The same is subject to outcome of Special Leave Petition.

Details of the Special Leave Petition are not forthcoming in the aforesaid order.

The order, non-compliance of which was alleged, specifically records that on regularization w.e.f. 01.04.2003, the petitioner was also to be paid all consequential benefits. Six weeks were granted for compliance of the order. More than one and a half year after passing the preemptive order by this Court, on the last date of hearing i.e. 24.05.2019, only order for regularization of the services of the petitioner has been passed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that consequential benefits have not yet been paid and seeing the conduct of the respondents, it will not be paid for years together.

Learned counsel for the respondents sought eight weeks' time for payment of consequential benefits.

Considering the fact that more than one and a half year has already been taken by the State to comply with the order passed by this Court, we do not find it appropriate to grant eight weeks time for payment of the consequential benefits.

Adjourned to 07.06.2019.

In case, the consequential benefits are not paid to the petitioner, the respondents, who have prima facie committed the contempt of the Court by not complying the order passed within the time granted, will remain present in the Court on the next date of hearing, to be heard on the quantum of sentence.