Court No. - 19
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2884 of 2018 Applicant :- Dr.Santosh Kumar Pandey And 2 Others Opposite Party :- Shri Mukesh Kumar Mishrram Secretary Ayush Counsel for Applicant :- Vikas Budhwar,Devesh Mishra Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
By means of this contempt application invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the petitions have alleged that in spite of direction of this Court dated 08th February, 2018 passed in Writ-A No. 38431 of 2016, their representation regarding counting of ad hoc period of service towards retirement benefits has remained undisposed of.
On 06.09.2018, the Court had passed following order:
"The opposite party has not taken any decision in compliance of the order of the Writ Court. He has also not appeared in person despite order dated 1.8.2018. The explanation furnished is that he has since been transferred. It is also stated that an SLP has been filed against the judgement passed by the Writ Court.
The order of the Writ Court is only to decide representation of the applicant for regularization of his services taking into consideration the decision of this Court dated 1.3.2012 in Writ Petition No.61974 of 2011 Dr. Amrendra Narain Srivastava Vs. State of U.P. and others.
Sri K.R. Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel seeks time to ascertain whether any SLP was filed against the main judgement in the case of Dr. Amrendra Narain Srivastava or not so as to enable the Court to ascertain the plausibility of the defence taken by opposite party for not deciding the representation. Sri K.R. Singh further states that if the matter is taken up after a week, the present incumbent will decide the claim and the opposite party shall also remain personally present on that date.
Accordingly, the matter is adjourned for one week. List on 14.9.2018"
In compliance of the order of this Court, Sri Mukesh Kumar Meshram erstwhile Secretary Ayush, is present today before this Court and has stated that he has since been transferred, the new incumbent has already taken decision on the representation of the applicants by passing order dated 13th September, 2018 directing for counting of ad hoc period of service of the applicant no. 1 towards post retirement dues, whereas in respect of applicant no. 2 and 3, decision has not been taken as they are still in service and the question of counting ad hoc period of service in question would arise only when they arrive at the age of superannuation. He states that there is no reason as to why similar benefit as being conferred upon applicant no. 1 will not be conferred upon applicant nos. 2 and 3 as and when they do arrive at the age of superannuation.
In the opinion of the Court, substantial compliance of the order of this Court has already been done under the orders dated 13th September, 2018, which has been placed before this Court and the same is taken on record.
Learned counsel for the applicant Sri Vikas Budhwar very fairly concedes that in view of the order passed by the competent authority, no more cause of action survives to maintain the contempt petition.
Accordingly, personal appearance of opposite party is dispensed with.
In view of the above, contempt application stands disposed of. Consigned to records.
Order Date :- 14.9.2018 Sanjeev