Gujarat High Court
Renukaben Karsanbhai Meda vs State Of Gujarat on 21 April, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia, Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/MCA/286/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONTEMPT) NO. 286 of 2025
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10011 of 2018
================================================================
RENUKABEN KARSANBHAI MEDA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
================================================================
Appearance:
MR NEERAJ J VASU(3159) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS NIRALI SARDA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No.1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 21/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. The present application has been filed seeking initiation of
contempt proceedings against the respondent(s) for deliberate
and willful violation of the order dated 12.12.2023 passed in
Special Civil Application No.10011 of 2018.
2. Learned advocate for the applicant Mr.Neeraj J. Vasu
submitted that after the aforesaid order was passed, the
respondent has re-fixed the seniority and also granted
promotion, but the intervening period has been considered as
notional after granting the deemed date of promotion to the
applicant from 04.04.2017. He has referred to the directions
issued by the learned Single Judge, directing the respondent
to grant the consequential benefit. It is therefore, submitted
that the respondent has committed willful and deliberate
violation of the order dated 12.12.2023 passed in Special Civil
Application No.10011 of 2018.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/MCA/286/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
3. By the order dated 12.12.2023 passed in Special Civil
Application No.10011 of 2018 by learned Single Judge in the
captioned writ petition, the following directions are issued :-
"9.1. The respondents shall readjust the seniority of the petitioner
as well as grant all consequential benefits to the petitioner as if
the impugned order dated 22.06.2017 had never been passed.
Insofar as arrears for the period from the date of appointment till
the date of reinstatement is concerned, the same shall be treated
as notional, but, should be counted for the purpose of pension
and other benefits."
4. The learned Single Judge has directed the respondent to
reconsider the seniority and also grant consequential benefits.
Further, with regard to the arrears, it is observed that for the
period from the date of appointment till the date of
reinstatement is concerned, the same shall be treated as
notional, but should be counted for the purpose of pension
and other benefits.
5. After the aforesaid order was passed, the respondent has
passed an order dated 24.12.2024 fixing the seniority of the
applicant and the applicant has been conferred the pay-scale
of Rs.39,900-1,26,600/-. The applicant has been granted
deemed date of promotion as 04.04.2017 on the post of Chief
Officer and her seniority is also fixed. It is further observed
that the period from date of reporting on the promotional
post may be treated as notional. The order dated 24.12.2024
of the Social Security Department, Gandhinagar is ordered to
be taken on record.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/MCA/286/2025 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
6. Thus, we do not find any deliberate or willful violation of the
directions issued by the learned Single Judge. At this stage,
we may note the observations of the Supreme Court in the
case of V. Senthur & Anr. vs. M. Vijayakumar, IAS, Secretary,
Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission and Anr., (2021) 11
S.C.C. 566, where the Supreme Court has held that while
exercising contempt jurisdiction, the Court will not travel
beyond the original judgment and direction; neither would it
be permissible for the court to issue any supplementary or
incidental directions, which are not to be found in the
original judgment.
7. Under the circumstances, we do not find any deliberate or
willful violation of the directions issued by the learned Single
Judge and hence, the application is rejected. Further, we
clarify that if the applicant is aggrieved by the order
24.12.2024, it will be open for the applicant to file
appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum.
Sd/-
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
Sd/-
(GITA GOPI, J)
CAROLINE / # 13
