Laxman Singh vs The Writ Court Had Directed The
2021 Latest Caselaw 88 UK

CLCON No. 112 of 2017
Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Mr. Mahavir Kohli, Advocate on behalf of Mr. B.S. Koranga, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. J.S. Bisht, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand.

The petitioner has filed this Contempt Petition, alleging non compliance of the judgment dated21.02.2017, as was rendered by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1925 of 2016, Laxman Singh Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others, whereby the Coordinate Bench of this Court by the direction given in para 5 of the said judgment, which is quoted hereunder :-

"5. Considering the above position where it has been admitted by the State itself that the petitioner name has wrongly been excluded from the promotion list, the writ petition is hereby allowed. A mandamus is hereby issued to the authority concerned i.e. District Education Officer (Elementary Education) to promote the petitioner to the post of Assistant Teacher, Junior High School or Principal, Primary School, depending upon the vacancy and pass an order, as expeditiously as possible, but definitely within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, in accordance with law."

The Writ Court had directed the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for promotion, as an Assistant Teacher in Junior High School or as a Principal, Primary School, depending upon the availability of the vacancy. Alleging its non compliance, the Contempt Petition was filed on 3rd May, 2017, on which, notices were issued by the Coordinate Bench of this Court on 4th May, 2017, and the respondents, thereafter, had filed the compliance affidavit on 12th June, 2017, and thereafter, the Contempt Petition was never listed for its consideration ever since 13th June, 2017.

However, on the perusal of the compliance affidavit, which has been filed by the respondents, the respondents have come up with the case that in compliance of the judgment dated 21.02.2017, the petitioner's claim for promotion has already been considered and he has been granted promotion by an order dated 6th May, 2017.

In view of the aforesaid fact, since the petitioner had already been promoted, the judgment dated 19.02.207, stands complied with, consequently the Contempt Petition is closed. Notices issued to the respondents are hereby discharged.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) Dated 08.01.2021 Shiv