Ram Teerath Pandey @ Ram Tirath vs Sri Girish Kumar Singh Distt. Inspector of School, Distt. Ambedkar Nagar and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Ram Teerath Pandey @ Ram Tirath vs Sri Girish Kumar Singh Distt. Inspector of School, Distt. Ambedkar Nagar and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim directions in the pending contempt proceedings: respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3 ordered to appear in person for framing of charges for non-compliance of the writ Court's judgment and order on the next date; case listed in the week commencing 24.03.2025.

Issue for consideration

Whether the conduct of the respondents (respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3) constitutes intentional and wilful disobedience of the orders passed by the writ Court, warranting framing of charges in the contempt proceedings. +1 more

Court's answer

Respondent no. 1 (DIOS) failed in performing his duties, having not asked the Management and the Principal how they were submitting bills ignoring the departmental reports and why false/manipulated bills were forwarded, although everything was on the record of the contempt application and available with him.

Ratio / Principle

Documents including reports submitted by Departmental Officials establish that the applicant was continuously functioning as Assistant Teacher.

Key takeaways

Despite the foregoing, respondent nos. 2 and 3 (the Manager and the Principal respectively) forwarded the salary bill only for a certain period and not for the entire period, as per the direction of the writ Court.ratio¶¶12
The conduct of the respondents is nothing but an intentional and wilful disobedience of the orders passed by the writ Court.ratio¶¶14
Respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3 are directed to appear in person on the next date fixed for the purposes of framing of charges for non-compliance of the judgment and order passed by the writ Court.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt Application (Civil) No. 4250 of 2024 (Hon'ble Manish Kumar, J.; High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench; order dated 3.3.2025): Applicant Ram Teerath Pandey @ Ram Tirath, an Assistant Teacher shown by departmental reports to have continuously functioned till superannuation on 30.06.2018 (per counsel's submissions), sought compliance with the writ Court's orders for payment of salary. The Committee of Management forwarded arrears only for July, 2008 to October, 2014 (Rs. 18,74,909/-); the DIOS (respondent no. 1), competent only up to Rs. 2 lakhs, referred the matter to the Director (approval required above 8 lakhs) on 19.02.2025, reminder on 28.02.2025, with no orders passed. Finding that respondent nos. 2 & 3 (Manager and Principal) forwarded the salary bill for only a certain period despite the departmental reports, and that respondent no. 1 failed in his duties, the Court held the respondents' conduct to be intentional and wilful disobedience of the writ Court's orders and directed respondent nos. 1, 2 & 3 to appear in person for framing of charges; case listed in the week commencing 24.03.2025.

Court No. - 17

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4250 of 2024

Applicant :- Ram Teerath Pandey @ Ram Tirath Opposite Party :- Sri Girish Kumar Singh Distt. Inspector Of School, Distt. Ambedkar Nagar And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Umesh Pratap Singh,Nasrul Hasan

Counsel for Opposite Party :- Shobh Nath Pandey

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

Sri Girish Kumar Singh Distt. Inspector Of School, District Ambedkar Nagar i.e. respondent no. 1 is present and has filed an application for grant of time along with the affidavit, which is taken on record.

Learned Standing Counsel has submitted that the Committee of Management has forwarded the payment of arrears of salary to the applicant since July, 2008 till October, 2014 and the amount comes to Rs. 18,74,909/-.

It is further submitted that the DIOS is competent to make payment of arrears of salary upto Rs. 2 lakhs and above 8 lakhs, it is to be approved by the Director, so the same has been forwarded to the Director on 19.02.2025 and thereafter, the reminder was also sent on 28.02.2025 but till date, no orders have been passed by the Director though it has been informed that the contempt proceedings are going on.

Learned counsel for the respondent-Principal has submitted that he had forwarded the correct bill and filed along with his affidavit wherein the bill of arrears of salary which was sent to the Manager w.e.f. 1991 but he had signed the subsequent bill of lesser period as asked by the Manager on the dictates of the DIOS.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is entitled for payment of salary w.e.f January, 1991 till June, 2018, whereas the Committee of Management has forwarded the salary bill for the period since 2008 till 2014 signed by the Principal also without any protest and stick to the earlier bills forwarded by the Principal.

It is further submitted that the applicant had been continuously functioning on the post of Assistant Teacher till the date of his superannuation i.e. 30.06.2018 and entitled for the salary as per the judgment passed by this Court and in support of his submission, he has drawn the attention of this Court to various documents filed along with the supplementary affidavit filed on 12.02.2025 which has not been disputed or denied by any of the respondents by filing the objection/counter affidavit.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record of the case, it is found that there are documents including the reports submitted by the Departmental Officials showing therein that the applicant was continuously functioning even then, the respondent nos. 2 & 3 i.e. the Manager and the Principal respectively have forwarded the salary bill for a certain period not for the entire period, as per the direction of the writ Court.

As far as respondent no. 1 is concerned, when all these documents were before him, then why he had not asked the Management and the Principal as to how they are submitting the bills ignoring the reports submitted by the Officials of the department where it has been mentioned that the applicant had been continuously functioning on the post of Assistant Teacher and why the false/manipulated bills have been forwarded. The respondent no. 1 has failed in performing his duties though everything is on the record of the contempt application and the copy of which is also available with him.

Such a conduct of the respondents is nothing but an intentional and wilful disobedience of the orders passed by the writ Court.

Let the respondent nos. 1, 2 & 3 appear in person for the purposes of framing of charges for non compliance of judgment and order passed by the writ Court, on the next date fixed.

List this case in the week commencing 24.03.2025.

Order Date :- 3.3.2025 Nitesh

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