Himachal Pradesh High Court
Manjeet Singh Age 53 Years vs Sh. Rakesh Kanwar on 1 November, 2022
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
ON THE 1ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHARMA
CIVIL ORIGINAL PETITION CONTEMPT (T) NO. 349 OF 2022
.
Between:-
1. MANJEET SINGH AGE 53 YEARS,
S/O SH. SWARAN SINGH,R/O
VILLAGE KAHANUWALA, P/O
SHIVPUR, TEHSIL PAONTA SAHIB,
DISTRICT SIRMOUR
2. RAJENDER KUMAR S/O SH.
GURDAS RAM, R/O VILLAGE
SINGHPUR, P/O BHAGANI TEHSIL
PAONTA SAHIB, DISTRICT
SIRMOUR, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
3. RAJA RAM SHARMA S/O SH. BANSI
LAL, R/O VILLAGE THANIKPURA,
P/O BHARWAIN, TEHSIL AMB,
DISTRICT UNA, H.P. AGED ABOUT 56
YEARS
4. KUSHAL DEV S/O SH. DURGA DAS,
R/O VILLAGE THANIKPURA, P/O
BHARWAIN, TEHSIL AMB, DISTRICT
UNA, H.P. AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
5. GOPAL SINGH S/O SH. KISHAN
SINGH, R/O HOUSE NO. 232, HOME
GUARD STREET LOWER DHIULI
MANDI, DISTRICT MANDI, AGED
ABOUT 52 YEAR
6. RAJ KUMAR S/O SH. KRISHAN LAL
R/O. VILLAGE GHUMARWIN,
DISTRICT BILASPUR, AGED ABOUT
53 YEARS
PETITIONERS
(BY MR. PARVEEN CHANDEL, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. SH. RAKESH KANWAR,
SECRETARY (AGRICULTURE) TO THE
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH.
2. SH. BAISAKHI RAM TAKHI,
DIRECTOR AGRICULTURE,
H.P., SHIMLA
::: Downloaded on - 02/11/2022 20:33:21 :::CIS
2
RESPONDENTS
(BY MR. SUDHIR BHATNAGAR AND
MR. NARINDER GULERIA,
ADDITIONAL ADVOCATES GENERAL
WITH MR. SUNNY DHATWALIA,
ASSISTANT ADVOCATE GENERAL)
Whether approved for reporting:
.
This petition coming on for orders this day, the court passed the following:
O R D E R
By way of instant contempt petition filed under Art. 215 of
the Constitution of India read with S. 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act,
1971 and Rule 9 of the Contempt of Court (Himachal Pradesh Rules,
1996, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioners for initiation of
contempt proceedings against the respondents, for intentionally and
willfully disobeying the direction contained in order dated 5.9.2017 passed
by erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in OA No. 4570 of
2017, titled Manjeet Singh and others v. State of Himachal Pradesh and
another, whereby petition was disposed of with a direction to the
respondents to consider the case of the applicants/petitioners, for
promotion in relaxation for Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 2007,
Annexure A-10. Since the respondents failed to do the needful in terms
of the judgment in question, petitioners have approached this court in the
instant proceedings, praying therein for initiation of contempt
proceedings against the respondents.
2. Mr. Narinder Guleria, learned Additional Advocate General,
while accepting notice on behalf of the respondents, states that though he
has reasons to believe that the order in question stands complied with,
but if not, same would be complied with, within a period of two weeks.
3. Consequently, in view of the fair stand taken by learned
Additional Advocate General, this Court sees no reason to keep the
present proceedings alive and same are disposed of with a direction to
the respondents to do the needful in terms of order (supra), within two
.
weeks, failing which petitioners would be at liberty to get the present
petition revived, so that appropriate action is taken against the
respondents. Notices issued to the respondents stand discharged.
(Sandeep Sharma)
Judge
November 1, 2022
(Vikrant)
r to
