Court No. - 10
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 6269 of 2018 Applicant :- Ram Sewak Opposite Party :- Raghvendra Prasad Singh Director Horticulture And Food Processing Department And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Bakhteyar Yusuf
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Shri K.R. Singh, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel.
The petitioner is before this Court for initiating contempt proceedings against the respondents for wilful disobedience of the order dated 05.12.2017 passed in Writ Petition No.57743 of 2017 (Ram Sewak v. State of U.P. & Ors.). The order dated 05.12.2017 is quoted as under:-
"Heard counsel for the petitioner and Standing Counsel for State-respondents.
The writ petition has been field for mandamus directing to the respondents to consider the petitioner for regularization of his services of Class IV employee under U.P Regularisation of Ad Hoc Appointments (on Posts outside the Purview of Public Service Commission) Rules, 1979 as amended time to time.
It has been stated that petitioner has been working as Mali in Horticulture Department since August 1988 regularly.The petitioner has moved a representation in this respect, which is pending.
The writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondent authorities to pass an appropriate order on the representation of the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of producing a certified copy of the order, accordance with law."
On the matter being taken up today, instructions dated 28.04.2019 have been filed by learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel intimating that the pursuant to writ Court order in question authority has ceased into the matter and the decision is likely to be taken soon. On account of ongoing General Election 2019 no final order could be passed in the matter and as such request has been made for according one month further time.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, once categorical instruction has been placed, this Court hope and trust that the authority in question would finalise the proceeding in response to the writ Court order in question expeditiously and preferably within one month.
In view of above, the contempt application stands disposed of at this stage with liberty to the applicant to move a fresh application, if the order is not complied with by the opposite parties within the stipulated time as aforementioned. Notices, if any, stand discharged. The instructions are taken on record.
Order Date :- 30.4.2019 SP/