AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This contempt petition has been filed alleging willful and intentional disobedience of the order dated 04.05.2016 passed in L.P.A. No. 641 of 2015.
The order dated 04.05.2016 passed by a Division Bench of this Court has not been challenged by the respondents.
This contempt case was instituted on 17.08.2016 and thereafter hearing of this matter has been adjourned on at least 15 occasions.
The proceeding in this contempt case would reflect that several adjournments were taken on behalf of the contemnors, but the Court’s order
has still not been complied by them. How casually the State respondents have proceeded in this matter is reflected in their conduct. Vide order dated
28.04.2017, they were directed to produce the records but they did not file the records for about one and half years and only when this Court passed
an order on 28.09.2018 again, the records were submitted by the State respondents.
On 28.4.2017, this Court has passed the following order:
“1. Heard Ms Suchitra Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, learned senior counsel for the Jharkhand
Public Service Commission as well as Mr. Vikash Kumar, learned JC to AAG, for the State.
Perused the order dated 4th May, 2016 passed in L.P.A. No. 641 of 2015, wherein this Court after considering the orders passed in W.P.
(PIL) No. 7525 of 2013 and W.P. (PIL) No. 5764 of 2015, set aside the impugned order dated 24.6.2015 passed in W.P.(S) No. 330 of 2013.
This Court directs the Registry to tag the record of the aforesaid W.P.(PIL) Nos. 7525 of 2013 and 5764 of 2015 with the present case.
JC to AAG is directed to produce the relevant record to show as to how calculation of backlog vacancy has been made in 4th J.P.S.C.
and whether compliance of the directions passed in the aforesaid PILs has been ensured or not.
List again after two weeks.
A free copy of the order be provided to Mr. Vikash Kumar, J.C. to AAG.â€
On 28.09.2018, this Court has passed the following order:
“Let the records be produced as was directed by the order dated 28th April, 2017.
Let the matter be listed on 5th October, 2018 at 1:00 pm.â€
The order dated 26.10.2018 records that this Court has found fault on the part of the State in not adhering to the provisions under the Persons with
Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995.
On 11.01.2019, the learned Advocate General appeared in the matter and made a statement before the Court that steps are being taken for proper
implementation in relation to reservation under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995
and on 06.03.2019 the State respondents- contemnors were directed to file their affidavit disclosing the manner in which they have complied with the
order passed by this Court. This order further records that several affidavits have been filed by the contemnors and the matter is pending since 2016.
On 09.05.2019, this Court has passed the following order:
“Accommodation is prayed for on behalf of the alleged contemnors.
Hearing is adjourned till 13th June, 2019.
The pendency of this proceeding shall not prevent the alleged contemnors from inducting the petitioner in employment in the event he
otherwise fulfills eligibility criteria and is also found to be fit for selection on the basis of applicable selection process.â€
In several judgments, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held and directed in so many words that all concerned must comply with the provisions
under the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 and whosoever fails to observe the
provisions under the said Act would be liable to be proceeded under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The claim of the petitioner has been admitted
by the State, but even after three and half years the Court’s order has not been complied.
Mr. Vikash Kumar, the learned State counsel submits that the order passed by Division Bench of this Court has been complied with and requisition
has been sent to the Jharkhand Public Service Commission for making name of suitable candidates available for appointment.
Along with the affidavit dated 11.06.2019, a copy of the letter dated 16.04.2019 has been produced.
The aforesaid proceedings in this contempt case would unerringly indicate that on one plea or the other the state respondents-contemnors have
taken several adjournments on the plea that they would comply with the court’s order, but, we find that the contents of the letter dated 16.04.2019
under which an exercise afresh has been undertaken is no answer to the adjournments taken for complying with the Court’s order. The stand
taken by the contemnor no.3, prima facie, does not reflect his bona fide.
We are not monitoring the exercise undertaken by the State; it may be a matter in the PIL. The records were called for to resolve the controversy
on number of vacancies and now it stands admitted that the petitioner shall be given appointment.
Finding the affidavit filed by the Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rasbhasa, Government of Jharkhand
unsatisfactory, it is rejected.
By way of last indulgence, the contemnors are directed to comply with the court’s order within a period of four weeks, failing which the
contemnor no. 3 shall remain physically present in the court on the next date of hearing.
The Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, shall look into the matter and ensure compliance of the Court’s order.
Sri. Anil Kumar Sinha, the learned senior counsel appearing for the JPSC assures the Court that all possible cooperation shall be extended to the
State authorities for compliance of the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 641 of 2015.
Post this matter on 23.01.2020.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the Chief Secretary and the Secretary, Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasa,
Government of Jharkhand.