Dismissed

Ram Sagar v. Ms. Reena Singh, Registrar, Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam Technical University, Lucknow and Another

Allahabad HC9 Dec 2024CAPL/881/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt application dismissed. The court held that the respondent had complied with the earlier order by considering the government guidelines and the five-member committee report in passing the decision on the applicant's promotion claim.

What did the court decide?

Contempt application dismissed; notice discharged.

What the court decided

Ram Sagar Vs Ms. Reena Singh, Registrar, Dr. A.P.J… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:82091

¶2

Court No. - 17

¶3

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 881 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ram Sagar Opposite Party :- Ms. Reena Singh, Registrar, Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam Technical University, Lucknow And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anushri Verma,Savita Kumari Counsel for Opposite Party :- Lalit Shukla

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard.

¶7

The present contempt application has been preferred for non compliance of judgment and order dated 16.10.2023 passed by the writ Court in Writ A No. 8021 of 2023. The relevant extract of the said judgment is quoted hereinbelow:-

¶8

"Considering the submissions made at the bar and the fact that the provisions of Clause 10 of the Government Order dated 28.05.1997 provide for steps to be taken, in the event, a procedure of sealed cover is adopted in respect of promotion, which has admittedly not been done by the University and no order exists to that effect, the present writ petition is disposed off directing the respondent no.3 to pass a fresh order on the claim of the petitioner for promotion. While doing so, the respondent no.3 shall have adequate consideration of the guidelines given in Clause 10 of the Government Order dated 28.07.1997 as well as the report the five member Committee. The respondent no.3 shall take decision within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order."

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in compliance of the judgment and order dated 16.10.2023, the representation of the applicant was decided merely on the basis of guidelines given in clause 10 of the G.O. dated 28.07.1997 without considering the five member Committee report, as directed by this Court by its judgment and order dated 16.10.2023.

¶10

Learned counsel for the respondent accepted the said objection raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and prayed to be allowed to revisit the matter as per the report of the five member committee also. The time was granted thereafter, a counter affidavit has been filed on 22.11.2024 along with an application for discharge of the contempt notice enclosing therein the decision taken on 20.11.2024 wherein the five member committee report was also referred and considered.

¶11

At this point, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the respondent while taking decision had not considered the letter/decision dated 05.05.2014 taken by the University itself which was taken by the Committee of five members constituted to investigate the matter.

¶12

The said submission/objection of learned counsel for the applicant is not acceptable for the reason that the said reference is while recording the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant before the writ court. The direction was in para 5 of the judgment and order dated 16.10.2023 which has already been quoted above wherein the representation was to be decided only considering two things, first is the guidelines given in clause 10 of the Government order and a five member Committee report which have been considered while deciding the representation of the petitioner by passing an order dated 20.11.2024.

¶13

In view of the facts mentioned hereinabove, the judgment and order of this Court has been complied with.

¶14

The contempt application is dismissed as such.

¶15

Notice if any, is hereby discharged.

¶16

Order Date :- 9.12.2024 Nitesh

¶17

Digitally signed by :- NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Sagar v. Ms. Reena Singh, Registrar, Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam Technical University, Lucknow and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Ram Sagar v. Ms. Reena Singh, Registrar, Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam Technical University, Lucknow and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mr. Rajul Maurya and Others Vs Dr. Harpal Singh, Chief Medical Officer Sitapur

Shashi Bala Vs Dr. Raj Shekhar, Managing Director, U.P. Jal Nigam (Rural) Lko.

Ankita Kapoor, Thru. Sri Suresh Chander Sood Vs Abhishek Mishra, Regional Manager, S.B.I. Lko.

Chandrawati Devi vs Ashutosh Tiwari Manager Shivram Junior High School Pratapgarh

Kunwar Singh vs Ms. Reena Singh, Registrar Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam Technical University, Lko. and Another

Srimati and Another vs Aryavart Gramin Bank Thru. Authorized Officer Barabanki and 2 Others