Shankar Ram Yadav And Anr. vs Renuka Kumar Addl. Chief ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 2897 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 6
 

 
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1238 of 2020
 

 
Applicant :- Shankar Ram Yadav And Anr.
 
Opposite Party :- Renuka Kumar Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Pramendra Kumar Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Rajnish Kumar,J.

Heard Sri Pramendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and learned Standing Counsel.

This application has been filed alleging non compliance of the order dated 21.11.2019 passed in Writ Petition Service Single No.32074 of 2019, by means of which considering the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants and without entering into the merits of the case, a direction was issued for disposal of representation in the light of the government order dated 29.10.2018 by a reasoned and speaking order and communicate the same to the applicants. The representation of the applicants has been considered and disposed of by means of the order dated 10.09.2017, a copy of which has been placed on record as Annexure No.CA 1 to the affidavit of compliance.

Perusal of the order dated 10.09.2017 indicates that the order has been passed in compliance of the order passed by the writ court and considering the government order dated 24.07.2018 by which the applicants have not been found eligible for grant of the second promotional pay scale, as they have not completed requisite period of service on cut off date. In regard to the government order dated 29.10.2018, it has been mentioned that the same has been passed in regard to only three employees of the District Deoria, that too under the directions issued in the contempt proceedings vide Contempt Application No.1924 of 2015, which has also been reproduced in the order. It has also been stated that since the said order has been passed under the threat of contempt, therefore it cannot be taken as precedent.

The identical issue has been considered by this Court today and a detailed order has been passed in Contempt Application(Civil) No.1237 of 2020, which is extracted here-in-below:

Heard Sri Pramendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and learned Standing Counsel.

This application has been filed alleging non-compliance of the order dated 14.11.2019 passed in Writ Petition Service Single No.30978 of 2019(Preetam Prasad Shukla versus State of U.P.).

Submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that the order passed by the writ court has not been complied with in letter and spirit. The representation of the applicants has been disposed of and rejected without considering the Government Orders dated 24.07.2018 and 29.10.2018, therefore, the same cannot be said to be in compliance of the order passed by the writ court. He relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar and others versus Meera Tiwary and Another;(2020) 17 SCC 305 submits that in case the orders have not been passed considering the case of the applicant, this Court can always issue a direction for making compliance in a particular manner.

Learned Standing Counsel submits that the writ petition was disposed of on an innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants for direction for disposal of his representation and without entering into the merits of the case. Therefore once the same has been considered by the authority in accordance with law and the government orders directed to be considered, it cannot be alleged that there is wilful and deliberate disobedience on the part of the respondents. In case the applicants are aggrieved by the same, they may avail the appropriate remedy as may be available under law. He also submits that identical contempt petitions have already been dismissed by this Court. The order dated 25.01.2023 passed in identical Contempt Application Civil No.2438 of 2019 has been placed on record.

Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I have perused the records.

The writ petition Service Single No.30978 of 2019 filed by the applicants was disposed of by means of the order dated 14.11.2019 on an innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants for direction for disposal of representation of the petitioners. The direction has been issued without entering into the merits of the issue. Therefore it is apparent that merits of the issue has not been examined by the writ court and only a direction was issued for consideration of the representation of the petitioners in the light of the Government Orders dated 24.01.2018 and 29.10.2018 filed alongwith the writ petition. In compliance thereof, the representation of the applicants has been considered and rejected by means of the office order dated 03.09.2020, a copy of which has been placed on record as Annexure No.CA 1 to the affidavit of compliance. Perusal of the same indicates that the representation of the applicant has been considered on merit as well as in the light of the government order dated 24.07.2018 and 29.10.2018 as directed by this Court. On the basis of the government order dated 24.07.2018, it has been stated that the applicants are not entitled for the second promotional pay scale, as they have not completed requisite period of service on cut off date. So far as government order dated 29.10.2018 is concerned, it has been mentioned that the said government order has been passed in regard to only three employees of the District Deoria, that too under the directions issued in the contempt proceedings vide contempt application No.1924 of 2015, which has also been reproduced in the order. It has also been stated that since the said order has been passed under the threat of contempt, therefore it cannot be taken as precedent.

This Court after considering the identical matter and the order passed by this Court dismissed the contempt application Civil No.2438 of 2019 on 25.01.2023 with the following order:

"Heard, Shri Pramendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Sunil Bajpai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondents.

This application has been filed alleging non compliance of the order dated 14.05.2019 passed in Writ Petition Service Single No.13667 of 2019.

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the directions issued by this court by means of the aforesaid order have not been complied with in letter and spirit because the representation moved by the applicant has been rejected ignoring the Government Order dated 29th October 2018, whereas in similar situation on the basis of directions issued by this court the benefit has been granted to some of the employees, one of such order has been placed on record by learned counsel for the applicant on record alongwith his rejoinder affidavit i.e. Shri Thakur Prasad, therefore he prays for issuing notice against the newly impleaded respondent.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the direction was only to consider and dispose of the representation of the applicant in the light of the Government Order dated 29.10.2018. The representation of the applicant has been considered and disposed of rejecting the same by means of order dated 6th of January 2020 as the applicant has not been found eligible for grant of the benefit as per the applicable Government Order. So far as the Government Order dated 29.10.2018 is concerned the same has been issued in regard to the employees of Deoria in pursuance of the contempt proceedings. Though it is recorded in the said Government order in the 1st paragraph itself that only those employees are entitled for the said benefit who have completed 24 years of service before 16.08.2003 as per the Government Order dated 21.03.2019. He further submits that considering the same compliance several contempt applications have been dismissed by this court. The order dated 09.02.2022 passed in Contempt Application No.1089 of 2020, order dated 13.05.2022 passed in Contempt Application No.1924 of 2019 and order dated 25.10.2021 passed in Contempt Application No.1515 of 2020 have been produced before this court. He further relies on a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme court dated 22 August, 2022 passed in the case of Vivek Kumar Singh Versus Udai Raj, Civil Appeal No.5775 of 2022 and submits that once the direction for disposal of the representation in the light of directions has been complied with wilfull and deliberate disobedience of the order passed by the writ court cannot be alleged.

Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record this court finds that the Writ Petition Service Single No.13667 of 2019 filed by the applicant was disposed of by means of order dated 14.05.2019 with the following order:-

"Therefore considering innocuous prayer of learned counsel for the petitioner, without entering into merits of the issue, the Principal Secretary, Revenue, Government of U.P., Lucknow (opposite party No.1) is hereby directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 16.04.2019, which is contained as Annexure No.11 to the writ petition, strictly in accordance with law as well as in the light of the Government Order dated 29.10.2018, contained as Annexure No.10 to the writ petition, by a speaking and reasoned with expedition say within a period of three months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order and thereafter the decision thereof be communicated to the petitioner forthwith. "

In view of above, considering the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner for disposal of his pending representation and without entering into the merit of the issue the court had directed to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner in the light of the Government Order dated 29.10.2018 in accordance with law. In pursuance thereof the representation of the applicant has been considered and disposed of by means of order dated 06.01.2020, a copy of which has been placed on record as Annexure no.C-1 to the affidavit of compliance filed by the respondents. Perusal of the same shows that the representation of the applicant has been considered and disposed of considering the Government Order dated 29.10.2018. Therefore if the same has been relied in any other case by some other officer, it cannot be said to be willfull and deliberate disobedience on the part of the respondent in the present case. This court in the aforesaid cases relied by learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has dismissed the identical contempt applications.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vivek Kumar Singh Versus Udai Raj (Supra) has held that if the original petitioner is aggrieved by such a decision appropriate course would be to assail the same in accordance with law and this cannot form the subject matter of contempt proceedings.

In view of above, this court is of the view that the substantial compliance of the order passed by the writ court has been made and if the applicant was aggrieved by the same he would have availed appropriate remedy as may be available under law.However this application has lost its efficacy.

The contempt application is, accordingly, dismissed."

This Court has also relied on a recent order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 22.08.2022 in the case of Vivek Kumar Singh versus Udai Raj, Civil Appeal No.5775 of 2022, in which the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that if the original petitioner is aggrieved by such a decision, appropriate course would be to assail the same in accordance with law and this cannot form the subject matter of contempt proceedings.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of the State of Bihar and others versus Meera Tiwary and another(supra) relied by learned counsel for the applicant has held that in proceedings for contempt, the High Court is entitled to pass orders for effective enforcement of an order, of which violation is alleged.

In the present case, there is only a direction for consideration of the representation of the applicants in the light of the government orders referred in the direction and to pass reasoned and speaking order and communicate the same to the applicants. Therefore once the representation of the applicants is disposed of, after considering the Government Orders, by passing a reasoned and speaking order, the wilful and deliberate disobedience of the order passed by the writ court cannot be alleged, thus the judgment relied by learned counsel for the applicants is of no assistance.

In view of above, this Court is of the view that substantial compliance of the order passed by the writ court has been made and if the applicants are aggrieved, they may avail the appropriate remedy as may be available under law. However,this application has lost its efficacy.

Dismissed accordingly."

In view of above, this application is dismissed.

Order Date :- 28.1.2023

Akanksha