CLCON/321/2017
2021 Latest Caselaw 3069 UK

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                  AT NAINITAL
       ON THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021
                        BEFORE:
 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI


     CONTEMPT PETITION No. 321 of 2017

BETWEEN:

Dinesh Chand Pokhariyal.                     ...Petitioner
     (By Mr. M.C. Kandpal, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr.
     Chitrarth Kandpal, Advocate)

AND:
S. Ramaswamy & others.                   ...Respondents
     (By Mr. H.M. Raturi, Deputy Advocate General for the
     State of Uttarakhand and Mr. V.K. Kaparwan, Advocate
     for respondent no.2)


                      JUDGMENT

Writ Petition (S/S) No.1921 of 2016 filed by the petitioner was disposed of by Writ Court alongwith other similar petitions vide order dated 05.04.2017 with a direction to respondents to consider petitioner's case for regularization. It was further provided that in case persons, junior to the petitioner, have been regularized, then petitioner shall also be regularized within ten weeks. Another direction, which was issued, was for payment of minimum salary to the petitioner, as was being paid to his counterparts in the Forest Department.

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

3. Learned counsel for the respondents have apprised this Court that, pursuant to the order passed by Writ Court, Managing Director, Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation passed an order on 29.08.2017, providing that petitioner shall be paid minimum salary admissible for the post of Scaler. As regards the second direction, regarding regularization in case persons junior to the petitioner have been regularized, learned counsel for the respondents submit that, in the absence of any clarity on the names of such juniors who have been regularized, claim of the petitioner for regularization could not be considered.

4. Learned Deputy Advocate General submits that if petitioner makes a representation indicating the names of the persons junior to the petitioner whose services have been regularized, then petitioner's claim for regularization shall be considered by the Competent Authority.

5. Learned counsel appearing for Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation also adopts the aforesaid submission made by learned Deputy Advocate General.

6. Since the direction for payment of minimum salary has been complied with by the respondents and the second direction for regularization has not been considered in view of the difficulty pointed out by the respondents, as discussed above, therefore, the contempt petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to approach the Managing Director, Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation by making a representation for regularization of his

services. In the said representation, he shall indicate the names of all those persons who, according to him, have been regularized by ignoring his claim. If such representation is made within two weeks' from today, the Managing Director shall examine petitioner's claim and take appropriate decision by passing a speaking order, in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks' from the date of receipt of representation alongwith certified copy of this order. The matter shall be then referred by Managing Director to State Government for necessary action and the State Government shall do the needful, as per law, within a period of four weeks' from the date of receipt of request, if any, by the Managing Director.

(MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.) Arpan