Uttarakhand High Court
Aryabhatta Research Institute Of vs Anand Singh Bisht And on 5 January, 2021
CLCON No. 836 of 2018
Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.
Mr. B.M. Pingal, Advocate for the
petitioners.
Mr. Sandeep Tiwari, Advocate for
the respondents.
The judgment rendered by the
Coordinate Bench of this Court on 21st
February, 2018, which was resulting into
the disposal of the Writ Petition,
directing the respondents to frame the
Rules for recruitment and promotion, of
the cadre of the employees, to which the
petitioner belongs, because in the
absence of there being any specified
rules, the petitioners' claim for
promotion and grant of the
consequential service benefits was kept
at stake, and abeyance too.
The said judgment was subsequently
made a subject matter of scrutiny in
Special Appeal No. 221 of 2018,
Aryabhatta Research Institute of
Observational Science (ARIES) Manora
Peak, Nainital, through its Director and
another Vs. Anand Singh Bisht and
others, which was ultimately decided on
18th April, 2018.
Despite of the said adjudication
having been made by the Division Bench
way back in 2018, the compliance has
not been made even after the institution
of the Contempt Petition on 31st
October, 2018, though, this Court had
accommodated the respondents on
number of earlier occasions by granting
them time to place on record the Rules
and Regulations, which they stated that,
they were pending consideration before
the Government of India; as they
wanted to notify the unified rules to be
made applicable in all such other similar
departments throughout the Country.
Even today, when the matter was
taken up, yet again, the same prayer
has been reiterated by he respondents'
Counsel, that there have been some
complexities at the behest of the
respondents/department of Government
of India, in formulating the Rules.
This lethargy or indecisiveness of the
respondents cannot be endured by the
Court for an indefinite period. Once the
Court has issued direction to formulate
the Rules, they were bound to comply it
and they should have resorted to an
appropriate recourse available to them
under law, and should have framed the
rules, as per the judgment of this Court.
Having not done so, this Court would
be confined in its consideration, to
ensure the compliance of the judgment
of the Coordinate Bench of this Court, as
well as the Division Bench. Since
apparently, as per the letter which was
read out by the learned counsel for the
respondents, Mr. Sandeep Tiwari, today
during the proceedings of the Court also
reflects that in fact, no Rules, as such
as of now have been framed, which will
amount to be an apparent non
compliance.
Hence, before taking any coercive
action, this Court feels it appropriate to
call for Mr. Thingom Lalit Kumar Singh,
Under Secretary, Government of India,
Ministry of Science and Technology to
appear before this Court on 12th
January, 2021, for framing of the charge
for apparent non compliance of the
judgment rendered by this Court.
List on 12th January, 2021.
(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.)
Dated 05.01.2021
Shiv
