Nilambuj Tripathi vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 3177 ALL

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 3177 ALL
Judgement Date : 9 January, 2025

Allahabad High Court

Nilambuj Tripathi vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 9 January, 2025

Author: Neeraj Tiwari

Bench: Neeraj Tiwari





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:5857
 
Court No. - 6
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5517 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Nilambuj Tripathi
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Satya Prakash Pandey,Syed Wajid Ali
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

1. Heard Sri Syed Wajid Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Manish Goyal, learned A.A.G. assisted by Sri Chandan Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:-

"1. To call for the records and to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing impugned orders dated 04.02.2022 and 23.02.2022 passed by respondent Nos.3 and 4.

2. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to provide all consequential benefits of service to the petitioner from due date in accordance with law."

3. The case was heard on 22.10.2024 and Court had passed the following order:-

"1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

2. Case was heard on 30.11.2023, Court has passed the following order:-

"1. Out of four petitioners in Writ - A No.- 25548 of 2010 which was finally allowed under the judgment and order of this Court dated 3rd August, 2018, one Nilambuj Tripathi has now approached this Court questioning the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate/ Up-Ziladhikari, Khajni, District- Gorakhpur dated 4th February, 2022. The order is being questioned on the ground that once initial order passed by this Court was affirmed in appeal except for the imposition of cost and contempt application being Contempt Application (Civil) No.- 3507 of 2020 was filed, and order of Writ Court came to be complied with under the order of District Magistrate approving regular appointment dated 8th January, 2021 and Additional District Magistrate (Finance & Revenue), Gorakhpur vide his order dated 16th January, 2021 directed the Sub-Divisional Magistrate concerned to pass order and then consequential order of fixation of pay was passed by the Joint Magistrate/ Sub-Divisional Magistrate, namely appointing authority, Khajni, Gorakhpur on 28th January, 2021, it was not open to review pay fixation order. The order passed on 28th January, 2021 was in following terms:

"??????? ??? ?????? 3507/2020 ???????? ???????? ???? ??. ????????? ???????

?????????? ??????? ??? ???? ???????? ?????? ????? ???? ?????? 29.09.2020 ?? ??????? ??? ?????????? ????? ?? ???? ?????? 08.01.2021 ?? ???? ??? ??? ?????????? (???/???) ?? ???? ?????? 442/????????-21 ?????? 16.01.2021 ?? ???? ??? ?????? ???????? ?? ????? ?????? 22.01.2021 ?? ???????? ???? ????????? ???????? ????? ???? ?????????? ???????? ????? ? ????? ???? ?????? ???? ??????? ?? ?????????? (NOTIONAL) ???????? ?????? 01.06.1995 ?? ???????? 5200-20200 ????? ????-2000 ????????? ?????? ???? ????-3 ??? ??????? ??? ?? ?? ???? ??? ???? ????????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ?????

???

????

28.01.21"

2. However, by the order impugned the order dated 28th January, 2021 has not only been sought to be corrected or reviewed but has the effect of sitting in appeal over the judgment of this Court. This Court in its final judgment dated 3rd August, 2018 had allowed petitioners' claim for regular appointment with effect from the date his juniors' claim were considered as per the seniority list -A/ merit list -A published on 26th April, 1995.

3. It appears, therefore, that before the Contempt Court the order dated 8th March, 2021 was made available by the respondents in order to challenge of the liability of contempt which shows that the order of writ Court affirmed in appeal was complied with and subsequently contempt application was got dismissed as withdrawn on 15th September, 2021. However, after the disposal of the contempt application the impugned order has now come to be passed on 4th February, 2022 and 23rd February, 2022.

4. This is, therefore, not only a case of contempt, civil in nature but the act and conduct of concerned officer also amounts to criminal contempt for having withdrawn the stand taken before the Contempt Court.

5. Prima facie, therefore, a case is made out to frame charges against the officer concerned to refer it to appropriate court for prosecution.

6. Let the then Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Khajni, Gorakhpur, who had passed the order on 4th February, 2022 and now wherever he is posted and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Khajni, Gorakhpur, who is currently holding the post, both shall be appearing in person before this Court to show cause as to why charges may not be framed against them.

7. List this matter on 6th December, 2023 at 2:00 pm.

8. Registrar (Compliance) shall communicate this order to the District Magistrate, Gorakhpur for ensuring compliance."

3. In the present case, counter affidavit has been filed and there is no denial of the fact so mentioned in the writ petition as well as facts recorded in the order dated 30.11.2023.

4. From perusal of the fact so mentioned hereinabove, it is serious matter inviting the proceedings of criminal contempt against erring officer.

5. Before that, respondent no.1 is directed to look into matter and take necessary action for withdrawal of impugned orders dated 4.2.2022 & 23.2.2022 or file his personal affidavit alongwith reason to this effect within three weeks.

6. List this case on 19.11.2024 at 2:00 PM.

7. Registrar (Compliance) is directed to send the copy of this order to respondent no.1 for necessary compliance within 48 hours. "

4. The respondent No.4 has filed an affidavit dated 10.12.2024 by which orders dated 04.02.2022 and 23.02.2022 have been cancelled.

5. Under such circumstances, the relief prayed i.e. prayer no.1 for quashing of impugned orders dated 04.02.2022 and 23.02.2022 have been granted by respondents itself. So far as second prayer is concerned, petition is allowed with direction to respondents to provide all consequential benefits of service to the petitioner within six weeks from the due date, in accordance with law pursuant to both the orders dated 28.01.2021.