Dismissed

Trilok Singh Martolia v. Om Prakash and Others

Uttarakhand HC4 Mar 2014CLCON/272/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A contempt petition alleging willful disobedience of a Division Bench order mandating fresh promotions in response to selection irregularities. The petitioner argued prompt action was not taken to regularize the selection. The Court examined the timeline against the three-month deadline.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition dismissed and notices against the respondent discharged.

Trilok Singh Martolia Vs Om Prakash and… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Uttarakhand HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Contempt Petition No. 272 of 2013

¶2

Trilok Singh Martolia … Petitioner Vs

¶3

Shri Om Prakash … Respondent

¶4

Mr. Alok Mehra, Advocate, present for the petitioner Mr. K.P. Upadhya, Chief Standing Counsel, present for the State of Uttarakhand

¶5

Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)

¶6

A willful disobedience of the Division Bench order dated 07.09.2012 passed in WPSB No. 199 of 2012 is alleged in the present contempt petition. The operative portion of the same reads as under:-

¶7

“We, accordingly, allow the writ petition and strike down the selection of respondent No. 4 and his promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer (Mechanical). He is reverted back to the post of Executive Engineer. It must be deemed that respondent No. 4 worked in the post of Executive Engineer when he purported to discharge the duties of Superintending Engineer (Mechanical). We direct the department to hold a fresh DPC. In the DPC, the persons eligible as on 1st July, 2011 shall alone be considered. In the event, the department concerned feels that, in order to ensure competition amongst the candidates, relaxation in the length of service is required to be obtained, they must take appropriate action under the 2010 Rules. The above exercise be completed within a period of three months from today.”

¶8

According to the petitioner subsequently the respondent has violated the above order against which the petitioner preferred this contempt petition. Today the matter was fixed for framing of charges against the respondent. Learned Chief Standing Counsel has draw the attention of this Court to the entire judgment dated 07.09.2012 and thereafter he states that as per the said order, liberty was granted to the respondent to grant

¶9

¶10

relaxation in the length of service as per the 2010 Rules. This relaxation was given to the persons who were ultimately promoted. Hence there is no violation of the Court’s order.

¶11

The petitioner contends that this order was passed on 07.09.2012 and respondents were asked to do the needful within a period of three months, of which, learned Chief Standing Counsel says that the respondent took charge of Irrigation Department on 10.06.2013 and thereafter certain time was spent in getting the age relaxation of some of the candidates. Therefore, there is no willful disobedience of the Court’s order.

¶12

On the rival submission of the parties and considering the documents available on record, this Court is of the opinion that though the action on the part of the respondent may still give rise another cause of action to the petitioner to challenge it before any other forum/court, but presently substantial compliance of the order has been made and this Court is of the view that there is no contempt is made out.

¶13

Accordingly, the contempt petition is dismissed. Notices are also hereby discharged.

¶14

(Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.)

¶15

04.03.2014

¶16

Aswal

Trilok Singh Martolia v. Om Prakash and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Trilok Singh Martolia v. Om Prakash and Others

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

Power Tranmission Corp. Of U.k. Ltd. Vs M/s R.s. Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. and Others

Mahendra Singh Negi and Others Vs State of Uttarakhand and Others

Smt Savitri Devi Rikhari Vs Niteshwar Kumar and Another

Ratan Lal Bali Vs Municipal Corporation Kashipur and Others

Satish Kumar Mishra and Others Vs State Of Uttar Pradesh and Others

Jai Singh and Another Vs Govind Singh Chauhan