Bihari Lal vs "In View Of The Above
2022 Latest Caselaw 2191 HP

                            1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
            ON THE 23rd    DAY OF APRIL, 2022
                          BEFORE




                                                      .
    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN





     CIVIL ORIGINAL PETITION CONTEMPT (TRIBUNAL)
                      1021 OF 2020





 Between:

     SMT. GAYATRI DEVI WD/O SHRI




     BIHARI LAL, R/O HOUSE NO. 38/9,
     BHAGWAN      MOHALLA,    MANDI,
     TEHSIL SADAR, DISTRICT MANDI

                          ...PETITIONER

 (NONE)



    AND




     1.   SHRI     JAGDISH    CHAND
     SHARMA,     I.A.S., ADDITIONAL





     CHIEF SECRETARY (EXCISE &
     TAXATION) TO THE GOVERNMENT
     OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA­





     171002 (H.P.)
     2. SHRI DEVESH KUMAR, IAS,
     EXCISE         &      TAXATION
     COMMISSIONER,         HIMACHAL
     PRADESH, SHIMLA­171009 (H.P.)

                      ...RESPONDENTS




                                     ::: Downloaded on - 25/04/2022 20:05:56 :::CIS
                                          2



(BY MR. AJAY VAIDYA AND MR. RAJINDER DOGRA,
SENIOR ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERALS WITH MR.
VINOD THAKUR, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL AND
MR. RAJAT CHAUHAN, LAW OFFICER)




                                                                              .

                This petition coming on for hearing this day,                              this





    Court passed the following:

                ORDER

The records reveal that the only direction passed by

learned erstwhile H.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A. (M) No. 146

of 2017 in case titled as, "Gayatri Devi versus State of H.P. and

others", dated 13.6.2017 is contained in para­5 of the judgment,

which reads as under:

"In view of the above, the present original

application is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to extend the benefit of the judgment referred to above, to the applicant herein, in case her

husband was similarly situate, within two months from today. The applicant shall produce a certified copy of this order as well as

copy of the judgment referred to above before the respondents/competent authority within a week."

2. The case of the deceased husband of the petitioner

was duly considered/examined by the DPC in its meeting held on

1.6.2019, wherein he was not found to be similarly situated to Shri

Vidhi Chand Sharma. It is found that the case of the deceased

husband of the petitioner for promotion was governed by the

Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 1996, as notified on 27.6.1996

and not by the Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 1974. Since the

.

respondents have considered the case of late husband of the

petitioner, as was directed by passing a consideration order in the

Departmental Promotion Committee, therefore, they cannot be held

guilty or prosecuted under the Contempt of Courts Act.

3. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. Notices

are discharged. However, it is made clear that in case the petitioner

is still aggrieved, she may avail such remedy, as may be available to

her. Since the petitioner has not put in appearance either in person

or through counsel, let a copy of this order be sent by the Registry

on the address given on the memo of parties. The pending

application(s),if any, are also disposed of.

(Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge

April 23, 2022

Kalpana