The Patna High Court dismissed a contempt application alleging violation of an order directing disclosure of daily wage employees. The court found that re-allotment was done via committee meetings and no contrary evidence was produced.
Contempt application dismissed as no case for contempt proceedings is made out.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.6 of 1993
====================================================== Sri Dina Nath Bhagat, Son of Sri Jagdish Prasad Bhagat, resident of Mohalla- Kali Bazar, Ward No. 9, Araria Municipality, Police StationAraria, District- Araria. .... .... Petitioner Versus .1 The State of Bihar, through Sri Arun Pathak, Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. 2. Sri K.B. Saxena, Additional Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna.
.... .... Opposite parties( Contemnors) ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashok Kumar Mallick, Advocate. For the O.Ps. : Mr. Vishwambhar Pd., A.C. to AAG IX, ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMAR DATTA and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMAR DATTA)
On a perusal of the order passed in this case from time to time by this Court, we do not find that at any stage proceedings of contempt have been initiated against any of the opposite parties. On the basis of averments made by the petitioner, a direction was issued by this Court on 03.07.1995 to file a supplementary show cause stating therein the names of the persons engaged on daily
Patna High Court MJC No.6 of 1993 (9) dt.02-04-2015
2 / 3
wages in the office of the Collector and the other offices under him, after passing of the order by this Court. It was made clear that if any such appointment will be found to have been made by the Collector or any authority, it will prima facie amount to disobedience of the order of this Court. Subsequently, the matter had come under the heading “For Admission” and ultimately it was admitted for hearing on 19.01.1996.
In the supplementary show cause filed on behalf of opposite party nos. 5 and 6, pursuant to the order dated 03.07.1995 of this Court, stand has been taken that the persons whose names were pointed out by the petitioner have been appointed on class IV posts, in fact, in the meetings of District Appointment-CumEstablishment Committee dated 16.08.1991 and 20.09.1991 and the subsequent meeting dated 05.12.1991 re-allotted the Department amongst the selected persons and accordingly, Annexure-11 series filed by the petitioner have been issued.
With regard to one Class-III employee, Gokhul Kumar Das, as pointed out by the petitioner, it is stated that he has never been appointed on class-III post in the regular Establishment, rather he was engaged on daily wage during the election period and strike of Non-Gazetted employees of the State since he was knowing stenography and typing work, whereas the petitioner has
Patna High Court MJC No.6 of 1993 (9) dt.02-04-2015
3 / 3
no such skill.
It is categorically asserted that no appointments have been made by the Collector, Araria, after the order dated 09.07.1992 passed by this Court in the writ application.
In the supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner thereafter it does not appear that the petitioner has succeeded in bringing anything on record which contradicts the stand of the opposite parties in their supplementary show cause.
We are thus of the view that no case for proceeding under the contempt jurisdiction of this Court is made out. The contempt application is accordingly, dismissed.
(Ramesh Kumar Datta, J)
(Anjana Mishra, J)
Jagsish/U.K./-
U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Collector's re-allotment of appointments to selected persons amounts to disobedience of the court's order and initiates a contempt case.
Dina Nath Bhagat
The State of Bihar
Ramesh Kumar Datta
Anjana Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
