Anil Kumar Joshi vs Shri Apurva Chandra
2021 Latest Caselaw 5730 HP

    IN   THE   HIGH    COURT    OF   HIMACHAL        PRADESH,            SHIMLA




                                                          .
                    ON THE 14th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021





                              BEFORE
                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHARMA





          CIVIL ORIGINAL PETITION CONTEMPT No. 364 of 2021

         Between:

         ANIL KUMAR JOSHI,





         SON OF SHRI MADAN LAL JOSHI,
         AGED 45 YEARS, RESIDENT OF
         ALPINE APARTMENTS, TOP FLOOR,
         NEAR MOHAN PARK, SOLAN,
         DISTRICT SOLAN, H.P.


                                                              ....PETITIONER
         (BY MR. JIA LAL BHARDWAJ,
         ADVOCATE)


         AND


    1.   SHRI APURVA CHANDRA,




         SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF
         INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING,
         GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,





         SHASTRI BHAWAN, NEW DELHI-110001

    2.   SHRI SHASHI SHEKHAR VEMPATI,





         CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
         PRASAR BHARTI, PRASAR BHARTI HOUSE,
         COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI-110001

    3.   SHRI NANDAN KUMAR,
         ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL (P),
         NORTH ZONE, O/0 DIRECTOR GENERAL DOORDARSHAN,
         DOORDARSHAN BHAWAN, COPERNICUS MARG,
         NEW DELHI-110001




                                         ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:26:02 :::CIS
                                               2




    4.    SHRI AMARENDRA KUMAR,




                                                                       .
          ASSISTANT DIRECTOR (P),





          HEAD OF PROGRAMME,
          DOORDARSHAN KENDRA,
          CHAURA MAIDAN, SHIMLA-171004





    5.    SMT. DHARA SARASWATI,
          D/O NOT KNOWN TO THE
          PETITIONER, PROGRAMME (EXECUTIVE),
          DOORDARSHAN KENDRA, AMBEDKAR CHOWK,
          CHAURA MAIDAN,





          SHIMLA-171004

    6.    SHRI ALOK KUMAR,
          PROGRAMME, EXECUTIVE DOORDARSHAN KENDRA
          CHANDIGARH, SECTOR-37-B,

          CHANDIGARH-160036

                                             ....RESPONDENTS

          (BY MR. BALRAM SHARMA,
          ASGI)



    Whether approved for reporting?.


    This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court passed the following:




                                          ORDER

By way of the instant contempt petition, prayer has been made

on behalf of the petitioner for initiation of contempt proceedings, against

the respondents for their having willfully and intentionally disobeyed the

directions contained in judgment dated 2.1.2021, passed by the Division

Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2957 of 2020, whereby Division Bench of

this Court while disposing of the petition having been filed by the petitioner

herein, directed the respondents to consider and reevaluate the

.

performance of the petitioner by the validly constituted screening

committee.

2. Pursuant to the notices issued in the instant proceedings,

respondents have filed their reply, perusal whereof clearly reveals that in

terms of the direction issued by the Division Bench of this Court,

respondents besides granting age relaxation have also considered/re-

evaluated the performance of the writ petitioner

3.

Though having carefully perused reply filed by the respondents,

this court is convinced and satisfied that the directions contained in the

judgment alleged to have been violated stands duly complied with, but

learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since due procedure has

been not followed by the respondents while re-evaluating and re-assessing

the petitioner, judgment alleged to have been violated cannot be said to

have been complied with. He further states that since respondents have

failed to follow the procedure earlier followed by them while conducting the

screening, reevaluation/re-assessment, if any, done by the respondents in

terms of judgment alleged to have been violated, cannot be considered to be

a valid re-assessment and reconsideration. However, having carefully

perused reply/affidavit filed by the respondents vis-à-vis directions issued

in the judgment alleged to have been violated, this Court finds no merit in

.

the aforesaid submissions of Mr. J.L. Bhardwaj, learned counsel, for the

reason that there was only direction to reconsider and reevaluate the

performance of the petitioner by validly constituted screening committee.

Since validly constituted screening committee in deference to the directions

passed by this Court has already reconsidered and revaluated the

performance of the petitioner, there appears to be no reason for this court

to keep the present petition alive.

4.

Consequently, in view of the above, present contempt

proceedings are closed and notices issued to the respondents are

discharged. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate

proceedings in the appropriate court of law, if he is still aggrieved.

    14th December, 2021                                    (Sandeep Sharma),
         (manjit)                                                Judge