Allahabad High Court
Abhishek Chaudhary vs Alok Kumar Agarwal Director ... on 18 May, 2022
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 18
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2359 of 2021
Applicant :- Abhishek Chaudhary
Opposite Party :- Alok Kumar Agarwal Director Treasury Lko. And Anr.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ranvijay Singh
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicant.
2. By means of the present writ petition, the contempt petition, the applicant has alleged that the order dated 22.06.2021 passed in bunch of writ petitions the leading being Writ Petition No. 24163 (SS) of 2019 has not been complied with.
3. Learned counsel for applicant has submitted that by means of the aforesaid judgment, this Court while disposing of the said writ petitions had directed the respondents to consider the petitioners thereof for promotion on the post of Senior Clerk/Assistant Treasury Accountant in accordance with 1978 rules as amended form time to time.
4. It has further been submitted that in pursuance of the aforesaid judgment, the Director, Treasuries has considered the case of the applicant and rejected his candidature for the said promotion by mens of order dated 25.10.2021.
5. Learned counsel for applicant has submitted that the said decision dated 25.10.2021 has not been passed in compliance of the order of the writ court and hence amounts to willful disobedience of the order of the writ court and hence present contempt petition has been filed.
6. It is noticed that respondents have duly considered the case of the applicant in compliance of the direction of this Court as contained in order dated 22.06.2021 and have concluded that 35 persons similarly placed have already been promoted and with regard to the applicant, it is stated that he is not eligible and therefore he cannot be promoted to the post of Assistant Treasury Accountant.
7. The decision has been taken after considering the case of the applicant in light of the U.P. Treasury Officers Account (Non-Gazette) Service Rules 2019 while the applicant submits that his case was to be considered in light of 1978 Rules.
8. Considering the aforesaid conspectus, of facts, it is noticed that the direction of this Court was to the effect that the case of the applicant was to be considered for promotion to the post of Senior Clerk/Assistant Treasury Account in accordance with 1978 Rules, as amended from time to time. The 2019 Rules have been brought subsequently, it cannot be said that there is any violation by the respondents in complying with the direction of the writ court. It may be the case of the applicant that he may be aggrieved by the order dated 25.10.2021 but that by itself will not be a ground to initiate proceedings under the contempt of Courts Act inasmuch as in exercise of power under the Contempt of Courts Act, this court would not go into the merits of the orders passed by the authorities in compliance of the directions of this Court for which purposes it is always open for the applicant to assail the said order dated 25.10.2021 before the appropriate court or appropriate forum.
9. This Court is satisfied that the order of the writ court has been complied with by the respondents wherein they have considered the case of the applicant and passed an order dated 25.10.2021. As the said order has been passed, it cannot be said that they have willfully and deliberately disobeyed the directions of this Court and accordingly subject to the aforesaid observations, the contempt petition is dismissed.
(Alok Mathur, J.)
Order Date :- 18.5.2022
Ravi/
