In contempt proceedings, the Court dismissed the case, finding no clear evidence of a willful and deliberate violation of its earlier order regarding the petitioner's promotion prospects.
Contempt Case dismissed.
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.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN
CONTEMPT CSAE No.1293 of 2009
ORDER:
The petitioner’s grievance in this contempt case relates to the non-consideration of his case for further promotion to the post of Supervisor Grade ‘B’. This Court, in its order in W.P. No.16826 of 1999 dated 28.08.2007, noted the relief sought for in the writ petition which was for promotion to the post of Supervisor Grade ‘B’ on par with other employees who were promoted notwithstanding the pendency of the writ petition with effect from 20.03.1999, and observed as under:
“the relief sought for in this writ petition would depend on the decision to be taken by the Selection Committee with regards the petitioner’s entitlement to be appointed as Clerk Grade-II with effect from 11.02.1998. Needless to state that, in case the appointment of the petitioner as Clerk Grade-II is upheld, he shall be entitled to have his case considered for subsequent promotion in accordance with law.”
This Court had merely observed that, in case the petitioner’s appointment as Clerk Grade-II was upheld, he would be entitled to have his case considered for the subsequent promotion in accordance with law. The respondents have considered the petitioner’s entitlement to be appointed as Clerk Grade-II with effect from 11.02.1998 and have, in fact, given him the benefit of such appointment. The petitioner’s grievance is that, while Sri V.S. Prakasa Rao who was also held entitled to be appointed as Clerk Grade-II as on 11.02.1999 was promoted as Supervisor ‘B’ category with effect from February, 1999, the respondents are procrastinating and have not, as yet, even considered the petitioner’s case for promotion as
Supervisor Grade ‘B’ on par with Sri V.S. Prakasa Rao.
Dr. P.B. Vijaykumar, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, would draw attention of this Court to the counter-affidavit wherein it is stated that, since the Director, Sugars was busy with elections, the petitioner’s case could not be considered earlier.
The jurisdiction which this Court exercises in contempt proceedings is limited and it is only on a clear case, of an order of this Court having been willfully and deliberately violated, being made out would this Court proceed further in contempt. All that this Court had observed, in its order in W.P. No.16826 of 1999 dated 28.08.2007, is that, in case the petitioner’s appointment as Clerk Grade-II is upheld, he would be entitled to have his case for subsequent promotion considered in accordance with law. Failure to consider his case for promotion to the higher category of Supervisor Grade ‘B’, in the absence of a specific direction by this Court to do so within a specified time frame, cannot be said to be a willful and deliberate violation of the order of this Court. I see no reason, therefore, to proceed further against the respondent. The Contempt Case is dismissed.
____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J
Date: 09.09.2010 MRKR
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the respondents willfully and deliberately violated this Court's earlier order by not considering the petitioner's case for promotion.
PETITIONER
RESPONDENTS
RAMESH RANGANATHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
