Allahabad High Court
Dr. Raj Kumar Sachan And Ors. vs Devesh Chatruvedi Addl.Chief ... on 20 January, 2023
Bench: Rajnish Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 6
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2860 of 2019
Applicant :- Dr. Raj Kumar Sachan And Ors.
Opposite Party :- Devesh Chatruvedi Addl.Chief Secy.Medical Health Family Andanr
Counsel for Applicant :- Hari Prasad Gupta
Hon'ble Rajnish Kumar,J.
Sri Rakesh Bajpayee, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits that in compliance of the order dated 02.08.2019 passed by the writ court in a bunch of writ petitions including the writ petition No.1639(S/B) of 2013 filed by the petitioners, order has been passed by the respondents on 29.10.2020. Copy of the order dated 29.10.2020 has been placed on record as Annexure No.1 alongwith the affidavit of compliance dated 30.10.2020 filed alongwith the application for discharge of notice and dismissal of the contempt petition. He further submits that considering the order dated 29.10.2020, an identical contempt petition No.1070 of 2020(Dr. Sarad Kumar Srivastava versus Amit Mohan Prasad, Prin. Secretary,Medical, Health and Family Welfare Lucknow) filed for compliance of the order dated 02.08.2019 has been dismissed and relying on the same the Contempt Petition No.2758 of 2019(Dr. Subodh Kumar Gupta versus Devesh Chaturvedi Prin. Secretary,Medical, Health and Family Welfare Lucknow) has also been dismissed. The order dated 10.02.2021 passed in the case of Dr. Subodh Kumar Gupta is extracted here-in-below:-
"Heard.
Sri Rakesh Bajpai, learned Additional Chief Standing counsel submits that in purported compliance of the order passed by the writ Court dated 02.08.2019 alleging non compliance of which the present contempt petition has been filed, the respondents-contemnor has proceeded to pass and order dated 29.10.2020 that the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit. Copy of the said order has also been given to learned counsel for the applicant in Court today.
Sri Bajpai places reliance on a similar order passed by the contempt Court in Contempt No. 1070 of 2020 Inre; Dr. Sarad Kumar Srivastava and ors Vs. Amit Mohan Prasad, Principal Secretary, Medical Health and Family Welfare and ors dated 02.12.2020 to contend that with respect to same judgment, the contempt proceedings filed by one Dr. Sarad Kumar Srivastava have already been dismissed. For the sake of convenience, the order dated 02.12.2020 is reproduced below:-
"Perused the order dated 02.08.2019 passed in bunch of writ petitions leading writ petition being No. 709 (S/B) of 2004 (Dr. Jitendra Pratap Singh And 58 Ors. Vs. State Of U.P.Through Its Chief Secy. U.P.Govt.Lko.And 3ors.)
The present contempt petition arises on allegation of non-compliance / violation of the said decision. On a perusal of the said judgement, the Court finds that there is no finding on merits as to the entitlement of petitioner to the benefits claimed in the petition, in stead, the Writ Court has taken note of pendency of Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court of India against the judgement and order dated 31.08.2017 passed in the case of (Dr. Ram Ji Pandey Vs. State of U.P.) and has observed that in view of the pendency of the said special leave petition before the Supreme Court no useful purpose would be served in keeping the present petitions on board which are therefore disposed of with the direction that the dispute pertaining to the petitioners shall abide by the final decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid Special Leave Petition.
However, thereafter in view of the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that opposite parties had made available to similarly situated persons the same service benefits as are being claimed in the writ petition even during pendency of the special leave petition before the Supreme Court as aforesaid, the Court observed that in view of the said submission the opposite parties may consider the grant of same service benefits as have been made applicable and paid to persons similarly situated as the petitioners within a period of eight weeks. Now in compliance thereof the State Government has passed an order on 29.10.2020 declining the claim of the petitioners for the benefits claimed, on merits.
Considering the fact that there is no finding in the judgement of Writ Court on merits as to the entitlements of the petitioners to the benefits claimed and the direction was only for consideration which has been done. It is now not open for the Contempt Court to delve into the merits of the reasons given in the order dated 29.10.2020 and determine its validity. This aspect can only be seen by the Writ Court.
In view of this, proceedings under the Contempt Courts Act, 1971 are not required, the same are dropped however, without prejudice to the rights of the petitioners to challenge the order dated 29.10.2020 before the appropriate Court.
Even if, as stated by Sri Gupta that order dated 29.10.2020 is not on merits but has been passed on the ground of pendency of special leave petition and pendency of review application in Writ Petition No. 709 (S/B) of 2004 and that the petitioners are not similarly situated as others who have been given the benefit is assumed to be correct, for the moment, even this aspect cannot be seen by the Contempt Court in the facts of the present case and no proceedings under the Act, 1971 should be drawn any further.
For these reasons these proceedings are dropped subject to the above."
Considering the aforesaid and the respondents having purportedly passed an order dated 29.10.2020, the contempt petition is dismissed and notices are discharged."
Considering the aforesaid and the respondents having purportedly passed an order dated 29.10.2020, the contempt petition is dismissed and notices are discharged.
Order Date :- 20.1.2023
Akanksha
