Disposed

Lalit Kumar Singh v. Deepak Kumar Gupta

Gauhati HC3 Mar 2023Cont.Cas(C)/4/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This contempt petition alleged violation of a High Court order directing the respondent to dispose of a statutory appeal. The Court noted the appeal was annexed to the writ petition but was missing from the bank's records. The Court closed the contempt petition but directed the bank to dispose of the appeal within two months.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition closed; liberty granted to file appeal; respondent directed to dispose within two months.

Lalit Kumar Singh Vs Deepak Kumar Gupta — Contempt of Court | Gauhati HC (2023)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC040000892021

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)

¶4

Case No. : Cont.Cas(C) 4/2021

¶5

1:Lalit Kumar Singh

¶6

S/o Late Arjun Singh Damai, R/o Naharlagun, Dist. Papum Pare, Arunachal Pradesh.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:Deepak Kumar Gupta

¶9

Chairman, the Arunachal Pradesh Rural Bank, Head Office E-Sector Shiv Mandir Road, Naharlagun

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : G Bhol

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : Gimi Tarak

¶12

BEFORE

¶13

HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Date : 03-03-2023

¶16

None appears for the petitioner, on call. However, Mr. Gimi Tarak, learned counsel, is present on behalf of the respondent.

¶17

This contempt petition has been filed, alleging violation of this Court’s order, dated 06.05.2019, passed in WP(c)136(AP)2019, whereby, the appellate authority of the respondent Bank was directed to dispose of the statutory appeal, dated

¶18

Page No.# 2/3

¶19

30.06.2018, filed by the petitioner.

¶20

An affidavit has been filed by the respondent, stating that the statutory appeal stated to have been filed by the petitioner on 30.06.2018, referred in the order, dated 06.05.2019, passed in WP(c)136(AP)2019, is not available in the record of the respondent Bank.

¶21

A letter, dated 07.05.2019, however, has been annexed as Annexure-D to the contempt petition, which is a letter written to the petitioner by the Disciplinary authoritycum-Chairman of the respondent Bank, whereby, it has been informed that the letter written by the petitioner, dated 05.07.2018, regarding imposition of removal of service of the petitioner, has been turned down by the appellate authority in its meeting held on 13.12.2018.

¶22

In view of the above; by order, dated 03.01.2023, the writ petition i.e. WP(c)136(AP)2019(disposed of) was requisitioned by the Court to ascertain as to whether the petitioner had annexed the appeal filed by him, dated 30.06.2018, in the writ petition, or not.

¶23

On perusal of the record of WP(c)136(AP)2019(disposed of); it is found that the writ petitioner had annexed the appeal, dated 30.06.2018, filed by him to the Board of Directors of the respondent Arunachal Pradesh Rural Bank under Clause 50 of the Arunachal Pradesh Rural Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulation, 2001, which has been annexed as Annexure-V to the writ petition.

¶24

In view of the above, this contempt petition stands closed with a liberty granted to the petitioner to file a copy of the appeal, dated 30.06.2018, before the appellate authority of the respondent Bank.

¶25

Page No.# 3/3

¶26

As and when a copy of the appeal, dated 30.06.2018, is filed by the petitioner; the respondent Bank shall consider and dispose of the statutory appeal, dated 30.06.2018, a copy of which may be filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and in any case, not later than 2 months from the date of filing of the appeal, dated 30.06.2018, by the petitioner.

¶27

The contempt petition accordingly stands closed and disposed of.

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Lalit Kumar Singh v. Deepak Kumar Gupta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalit Kumar Singh v. Deepak Kumar Gupta

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

Similar cases

Azizul Islam Ahmed Vs Smt. Suranjana Senapati, Acs

Fujail Ahmed Vs Partha Pratim Majumdar, IAS and 2 Ors.

Gopichand Bhagat Vs Mukul Kumar Saikia and Anr.

Ambika Das Vs Mukul Kumar Saikia, Acs and Anr.

Hmingthansiama Vs Smt Renu Sharma, State of Mizoram r/b Chief Secretary and 8 Ors.

Kanchan Nessa Vs Diganta Barah

Gautam Kumar Baishya Vs Sri Shamsher Singh and Ors.

Dharmeswar Deka Vs Madhab Chandra Deka

Neelam Richo and 5 Ors. Vs the State of Ap and 5 Ors.

Shri Obit Dai Vs The State of Ap and 2 Others

Mejo Sangbia and 113 Ors. Vs the State of Ap and 4 Ors.

M/s G. T Enterprises Vs the State of Ap and 6 Ors.

Tai Talley Vs The State of Ap and 2 Others

Rimmar Taso Vs the State of Ap and 2 Ors.