Himachal Pradesh High Court
Copct Nos. 809 vs Kaushik on 16 March, 2021
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
COPCT Nos. 809, 812 and 815 of
.
16.3.2021 Present: Mr.Hamender Singh Chandel, Advocate, for the
petitioner(s) in all the petitions.
Ms.Leena Guleria, Advocate, vice Ms.Ruma
Kaushik, Advocate, for respondents, in all the
petitions.
In response filed on behalf of respondent No. 1, it
is stated that order, for violation of which present petition(s)
have been filed, stands assailed by means of Writ Petition
preferred by HPSEB in this Court, however, the number of Writ
Petition has not been mentioned in the reply and it has been
mentioned as CWP No... of 2020, which indicates that at the
time of filing this reply/affidavit, Writ Petition was not preferred
at all and in any case if it was preferred, then it was in the year
2020, by which order dated 12.1.2018 has been assailed.
From the tone and tenor of the reply, it is evident that there is
no stay against the implementation of order dated 12.1.2018
passed by erstwhile Administrative Tribunal. Perusal of order
indicates that an undertaking was given on behalf of HPSEB
that subject to verification of record, if it was found that
petitioners are similarly situated as of the petitioners in CWP
No. 5639 of 2014, their cases shall also be considered
accordingly. On the basis of said undertaking, direction was
given to the concerned authority that, subject to verification and
on findings the petitions to be similarly situated as referred
supra, to extend benefit of the said judgment, if the same has
attained finality/implemented, to the petitioners along with
consequential benefit.
.
In reply it is not case of the respondents that
petitioner(s) are not similarly situated to the petitioners in CWP
No. 5639 of 2014 and further that judgment in said Writ Petition
has not attained finality or has not been implemented. Present
petition(s) were filed in the year 2019 and response to it have
been filed in February, 2021, that too after passing of stop
order by this court on 3.11.2020.
The order for violation of which, present Contempt
Petitions have been field, is claimed to have been assailed by
respondents by filing Writ Petition. Perusal of order clearly
reflects that nothing has been decided by the order except
directing the concerned authority, as undertaken on its behalf,
to verify the facts and on findings the petitioners to be similarly
situated as claimed by them, to extend the benefits to them
along with consequential benefits in case the judgment passed
in CWP No. 5639 of 2014 has attained finality. Therefore, filing
of Writ Petition after gap of two years is nothing but is a
deliberate attempt of the respondents to avoid the
implementation of order passed by erstwhile Tribunal, which
definitely amounting to flouting the order willfully, particularly,
when, as submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners, the
judgment in CWP No. 5639 of 2014 has attained finality and
stands implemented by HPSEB and the petitioners are
identically situated to the petitioners in CWP No. 5639 of 2014.
In aforesaid circumstances, it is apparent that
action of respondents is definitely amounting to willful
.
disobedience of the order of the Court. As prayed, by learned
counsel appearing for the respondents, adjourned for
23rd March, 2021, enabling learned counsel for the
respondents to have current instructions on behalf of
respondents with respect to the action taken by them to purge
the contempt.r (Vivek Singh Thakur),
Judge.
16th March, 2021
(Keshav)
