Dismissed

Sanjay Massey v. Miss v Sherring

Uttarakhand HC5 Sept 2019CLCON/321/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A contempt petition alleging willful disobedience of a writ order directing the Manager to provide joining and allowance. The court dismissed the petition after the respondent admitted compliance via affidavit, discharging the contempt notice while leaving open the petitioner's right to approach other forums for any survival of grievance.

What did the court decide?

Contempt notice discharged; contempt petition dismissed; petitioner allowed to approach appropriate forum if grievance survives.

Sanjay Massey Vs Miss v. Sherring — Service and Employment | Uttarakhand HC (2019)

¶1

CLCON No. 321 of 2014 Hon’ble Manoj K. Tiwari, J.

¶2

None appears for the parties.

¶3

This contempt petition has been filed alleging willful disobedience of the judgment and order dated 07.08.2013 rendered in WPSS No. 642 of 2011. Relevant portion of the said judgment is extracted herein below:

¶4

“In view of the above, the writ petition succeeds and is hereby allowed. Impugned Orders dated 6.5.2011, 31.5.2011 and 2.6.2011 are hereby quashed. Respondent Management Committee is hereby directed to give the petitioner joining forthwith within a period of 4 weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before it. Since, while disposing of the earlier writ petition (i.e. Writ Petition (S/S) 563 of 2009), this Court had directed that the period till the matter is disposed of by the respondents shall be considered as period under suspension, respondents are hereby directed to give the subsistence allowance to the petitioner for the said period within a period of six weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before the concerned authority.”

¶5

A counter affidavit has been filed by the opposite party (Manager), Ferger Junior High School, 51 Rajpur Road, Dehradun. Para 7 of the said affidavit is extracted herein below:

¶6

“That under the aforesaid circumstances the order passed by this Hon’ble Court in Writ Petition No. 642 of 2011 (S/S) Sanjay Massey vs. State of Uttarakhand and others has already been complied with and the delay caused in completing the process is due to institutional work and preparing the bill since the year 2009 to 2014. It will not be

¶7

out place to mention here that the petitioner himself being a class III employee prepared the bill and after completion of bill he put his signature on the bill dated 2.12.2014. The delay in preparing the bill is not on the part of answering respondent but also on the part of petitioner himself. Therefore, the delay in compliance is not willful and deliberate but is bona fide for which the answering respondent tenders unconditional apology before this Hon’ble Court.”

¶8

In view of the categorical stand taken by the Manager in her affidavit that compliance of the judgment has been made, nothing survives in the Contempt Petition.

¶9

Contempt Notice issued against the opposite party is discharged. Contempt petition stands dismissed .

¶10

However, the contempt-petitioner shall be at liberty to approach the appropriate forum, if his grievance survives.

¶11

(Manoj K. Tiwari, J.) Kaushal 05.09.2019

Sanjay Massey v. Miss v Sherring

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Massey v. Miss v Sherring

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

Rajveer Singh Vs State Of Uttarakhand and Others

Rakesh Aggarwal Vs State Of Uttarakhand and Others

Vinod Kumar Vs Jai Raj

H.s.madhukar Vs Arun Yeshwant Pathak

Bazpur Stone Crusher Pvt. Ltd. Vs Rahul and Another

M/S Dabur India Limited Vs Deepak Kumar Joshi