Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Ajay Ku.Nath Vs Bandana Kar — Orissa HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Home
Orissa HC
2024
Ajay Ku.Nath Vs Bandana KarAjay Ku.Nath v. Bandana Kar

Disposed¶33

Ajay Ku.Nath v. Bandana Kar

Orissa HC21 May 2024CONTC/44/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court CONTC 44/2018, order dated 21.05.2024; petitioner Ajaya Kumar Nath (adv. B.S. Tripathy) v. Ms. Bandana Kar, Registrar, Civil Courts, Dhenkanal (adv. L. Samantray, AGA); alleges disobedience of order dated 26.03.2013 in W.P.(C) No.3427 of 2013 re common another gradation list of Class-IV employees (Candidate Peons, Night Watchman, Gardener) under District and Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal; earlier contempt CONTC No.1310 of 2013 disposed 17.08.2017 seeking compliance within three months; Court declines to proceed owing to long passage of time; contempt petition disposed of. Bench per signature block: Chakradhari Sharan Singh, Chief Justice; M.S. Raman, Judge (joint 'we' order).

What did the court decide?

Because of the long passage of time from the date of the first order passed in 2013, this Court is not inclined to proceed further in the present contempt matter.

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

Issue for consideration

Whether contempt action lies for alleged disobedience of the Court's order dated 26.03.2013 in W.P.(C) No.3427 of 2013, and whether the present contempt petition (filed 2018) should be proceeded with.

Court's answer

Because of the long passage of time from the date of the first order passed in 2013, this Court is not inclined to proceed further in the present contempt matter.

Ratio / Principle

On that view, the present contempt petition stands disposed of.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt petition (CONTC No. 44 of 2018, High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, order dated 21.05.2024) filed by Ajaya Kumar Nath alleging disobedience of the Court's order dated 26.03.2013 in W.P.(C) No.3427 of 2013. That writ order, disposing of a large petitioners' complaint that a common another gradation list of Class-IV employees under the District and Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal could not have been prepared, had directed the Registrar, Civil Courts, Dhenkanal (opp. party No. 2) to examine the grievance and take a decision within two months of receiving the certified copy of the order with the writ petition and annexures. An earlier contempt petition, CONTC No. 1310 of 2013, disposed on 17.08.2017, had sought compliance within three months. The present petition, filed in 2018 and listed for the first time on 21.05.2024, was not proceeded with: citing the long passage of time since the 2013 order, the Court disposed of the contempt petition without further contempt action.

A

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

CONTC No. 44 of 2018

Ajaya Kumar Nath …. Petitioner

Mr. B.S. Tripathy, Advocate

-versus-

Ms. Bandana Kar, Registrar, Civil Courts, Dhenkanal

…. Opposite Party

Mr. L. Samantray, Additional Government Advocate

CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

ORDER

Order No.

21.05.2024

This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

The petitioner has filed the present contempt petition alleging disobedience of an order of this Court dated 26.03.2013 passed in W.P.(C) No.3427 of 2013. The said order reads as under:

“Heard.

Large number of petitioners preferred the present writ petition, inter alia, making allegation that a common another gradation list of Class-IV employees under the District and Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal could not have been prepared in respect of Candidate Peons, Night Watchman, Gardener etc.

It appears that individual representations have been made under Annexure-3 series to the Registrar, Civil Courts, Dhenkanal in this regard.

We, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the contention raised direct opp. Party No.2Registrar, Civil Courts, Dhenkanal to look into the

Page 1 of 3

grievance of the petitioners and take a decision thereon within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order along with a copy of the writ petition and all its annexures before him.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.”

The petitioners had filed contempt petition earlier giving rise to CONTC No.1310 of 2013, which was disposed of by an order dated 17.08.2017. The said order reads thus:

“Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

It is stated that the order dated 26.03.2013 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.3427 of 2013 has not yet been complied with.

Let the authority comply with the same, if not complied with in the meantime, within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order by the petitioners.

Contempt proceeding is disposed of accordingly.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.”

The present contempt petition came to be filed in the year 2018 whereafter, it has been listed for the first time today.

Because of long passage of time from the date when the first order which was passed in 2013, we are not inclined to proceed further in the present contempt matter.

Page 2 of 3

In such view of the matter, the present contempt petition stands disposed of.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh) Chief Justice

(M.S. Raman) Judge

S. Behera

Signature Not Verified

Page 3 of 3

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUMANTA BEHERA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 23-May-2024 16:29:48

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether contempt action lies for alleged disobedience of the Court's order dated 26.03.2013 in W.P.(C) No.3427 of 2013, and whether the present contempt petition (filed 2018) should be proceeded with.¶15
The court held
Because of the long passage of time from the date of the first order passed in 2013, this Court is not inclined to proceed further in the present contempt matter.ratio¶31

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Alleged disobedience/non-compliance with the High Court's order dated 26.03.2013 passed in W.P.(C) No.3427 of 2013, which had directed the Registrar, Civil Courts, Dhenkanal (opp. party No. 2) to look into the petitioners' grievance and take a decision within two months.¶15
High Court of Orissa (order in W.P.(C) No.3427 of 2013) · 26.03.2013
Prior proceeding
W.P.(C) No. 3427 of 2013, preferred by a large number of petitioners alleging that a common another gradation list of Class-IV employees under the District and Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal could not have been prepared in respect of Candidate Peons, Night Watchman, Gardener etc., was disposed of by order dated 26.03.2013; the Court, without expressing any opinion on merits, directed opp. party No. 2, Registrar, Civil Courts, Dhenkanal, to look into the grievance and take a decision within two months from production of the certified copy of the order along with the writ petition and all its annexures.¶21
Prior proceeding
An earlier contempt petition, CONTC No. 1310 of 2013, was disposed of by order dated 17.08.2017, directing the authority to comply with the order dated 26.03.2013, if not complied with in the meantime, within three months from the date of communication of that order by the petitioners.¶27

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Ajaya Kumar Nath¶3
B.S. Tripathy
respondent
Ms. Bandana Kar, Registrar, Civil Courts, Dhenkanal¶6
L. Samantray

Coram

AI extract

Chakradhari Sharan Singhmember¶34
M.S. Ramanmember¶35

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Orissa HC
Decided on: 21 May 2024 · May
Registered: 10 Jan 2018
Case no.: CONTC/44/2018
CNR: ODHC010016562018
Bench: Chakradhari Sharan Singh Murahari Sri Raman
Disposal: Disposed Off
Case type: CONTC

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Chakradhari Sharan Singh Murahari Sri Raman

Banabihari Rath Vs State of Odisha
20 May 2024
College of B.Sc Nursing Training, Baripada Vs State of Odisha
20 May 2024
Rubi Mahapatra Vs the State of Odisha
20 May 2024
M/S Maa Bhuinani Cashew Procession Unit Vs S.K.Kamar Alli
21 May 2024
Laxmipriya Behera Vs Tanima Mishra
21 May 2024
Sachidananda Balabantaray Vs Srikanta Parija, O.A.S. (Jr.)
21 May 2024

Cite this judgement

Ajay Ku.Nath v. Bandana Kar, CONTC/44/2018 (OD), decided on 21 May 2024.

The High Court of Orissa publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Procedural history3

Alleged disobedience/non-compliance with the High Court's order dated 26.03.2013 passed in W.P.(C) No.3427 of 2013, which had directed the Registrar, Civil Courts, Dhenkanal (opp. party No. 2) to look into the petitioners' grievance and take a decision within two months.High Court of Orissa (order in W.P.(C) No.3427 of 2013) · 26.03.2013
W.P.(C) No. 3427 of 2013, preferred by a large number of petitioners alleging that a common another gradation list of Class-IV employees under the District and Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal could not have been prepared in respect of Candidate Peons, Night Watchman, Gardener etc., was disposed of by order dated 26.03.2013; the Court, without expressing any opinion on merits, directed opp. party No. 2, Registrar, Civil Courts, Dhenkanal, to look into the grievance and take a decision within two months from production of the certified copy of the order along with the writ petition and all its annexures.
An earlier contempt petition, CONTC No. 1310 of 2013, was disposed of by order dated 17.08.2017, directing the authority to comply with the order dated 26.03.2013, if not complied with in the meantime, within three months from the date of communication of that order by the petitioners.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Chakradhari Sharan Singh and M.S. Raman

Parties & counsel