CLCON/316/2017
2021 Latest Caselaw 3037 UK

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                    AT NAINITAL
       ON THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021
                       BEFORE:
 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI


     CONTEMPT PETITION No. 316 of 2017

BETWEEN:

Tej Pal Singh.                              ...Petitioner
     (By Mr. Rajendra Arya, Advocate)

AND:
Ashok Gusain.                              ...Respondent
     (By Mr. J.S. Bisht, Standing Counsel for the State of
     Uttarakhand)


                     JUDGMENT

WPSS No. 2094 of 2016 filed by the petitioner was decided alongwith other similar writ petitions vide order dated 21.04.2017. Operative portion of the said order is reproduced below:

"Accordingly, these writ petitions are allowed in terms of the judgment cited hereinabove. The impugned termination orders passed in all the connected writ petitions are quashed and set-aside. The respondent-State is directed to reinstate the petitioner(s) in all the connected matters with all consequential benefits with a period of six weeks from today.

However, liberty is reserved to the respondent-State to proceed with the matter in accordance with law."

2. Alleging willful violation of the said order, this Contempt Petition has been filed.

3. Today, learned Standing Counsel, on instructions, submits that the order passed by Writ Court in favour of the petitioner was modified by Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.02.2019 passed in Special Appeal No. 623 of 2017 and it was provided that enquiry initiated against the petitioner shall be concluded within four months and, till then, he shall be deemed to be under suspension. He further submits that, pursuant to the order passed by Division Bench of this Court, enquiry was concluded and an order was passed against the petitioner on 30.07.2020, whereby his services were terminated on the ground that his B.T.C. Certificate was found to be forged in the enquiry.

4. In view of the statement made by learned Standing Counsel, it is apparent that this is not a case of willful disobedience of the order of this Court.

5. Accordingly, the contempt petition is closed.

6. Contempt notices issued to the respondents are hereby discharged.

(MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.) Arpan