JUDGMENT Hon’ble Arun Tandon, J.—Heard Sri S.C. Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri R.K. Singh ‘Rajpoot’ and Sri Ram Sajivan, learned counsels for respondent namely, Trilok Singh and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. 2. The basic facts, relevant for decision of the disputes raised in the aforesaid both the writ petitions are more or less identical, and legal aspects involved are also identical. Both the writ petitions are being decided by this common judgment. 3. While entertaining the Writ Petition No. 33169 of 2009, on 22nd July, 2009 this Court had passed following orders : “Connect with Writ Petition Nos. 1. W.P. No. 12960 of 2007 2. W.P. No. 24263 of 2007 3. W.P. No. 22119 of 2008 4. W.P. No. 26963 of 2009 From the record of the present writ petition, it is prima facie clear that Sri Trilok Singh has taken law into his own hand and with the collusion of the Regional Joint Director of Education has made an attempt to over reach the judgment/proceeding pending before this Court. Such acts amount to interference in the administration of justice and therefore, criminal contempt. However, before any orders are passed, it is necessary that Sri Trilok Singh be afforded opportunity to have his say in the matter. Let notice be issued to Sri Trilok Singh to remain present before this Court on 4th August, 2009 to explain as to how after the judgment of this Court passed in Writ Petition No. 12960 of 2007 decided on 30th April, 2007 (to which he was a party and was decided after hearing his counsel) holding that no direct recruitment on the post of Head Clerk would be made in the institution. He filed Writ Petition No. 24263 of 2007 and obtained an order from this Court on 22nd May, 2007 for consideration of the approval qua his appointment by direct recruitment against the same vacancy. Such order resulted in the Regional Level Committee passing an order granting approval to the appointment of Sri Trilok Singh by direct recruitment on the post in question. Prima facie the order of the Regional Level Committee is in teeth of the judgment of this Court dated 12th March, 2007 referred to above and therefore, more or less contemptuous in nature. The petitioner has made out a prima facie case for grant of an interim order. Prima facie the order of the Regional Level Committee is in teeth of the judgment of this Court dated 12th March, 2007 referred to above and therefore, more or less contemptuous in nature. The petitioner has made out a prima facie case for grant of an interim order. Till the next date of listing Sri Trilok Singh S/o Sri Nathu Ram shall not be paid salary without the leave of the Court. Regional Joint Director of Education shall file his personal affidavit as to how direct recruitment on the aforesaid post could be made and approved.” 4. On 13th August, 2009, the matter was argued by the learned counsels with all vehemence at command. However, on being confronted with the seriousness of the consequences which may follow the learned counsels, took time to re-examine all the aspects of the matter. 5. Affidavits filed today by Ram Sajivan, Advocate, Sri R.K. Singh ‘Rajpoot’, Advocate and respondent Trilok Singh, in person are taken on record. 6. From the records, this Court finds that not only a caveat application on behalf of Trilok Singh was filed but also a counter affidavit was filed in 12960 of 2007. The writ petition was decided after hearing the learned counsel representing Trilok Singh. This Court in the facts of the present case finds that the course available to the Court is to direct initiation of Criminal Contempt Proceedings. 7. From the affidavits filed today, it is apparent that both the learned counsels and Trilok Singh have expressed their unconditional apology and have prayed pardon for the mistake committed. In the affidavit, it has been stated by Trilok Singh that he will not seek appointment on the post of clerk by direct recruitment and will not claim any benefit of salary etc. in terms of the impugned order. 8. In view of the aforesaid, the unconditional apology tendered by the advocates and Trilok Singh is accepted. 9. The petitioner, Asarfi Lal has been denied his rightful duties for about one year because of orders of education authorities and uncalled for litigation generated, it would be appropriate that Trilok Singh may be directed to pay a cost of Rs. 20,000/- to the petitioner within two months from today by way of bank draft. 10. 9. The petitioner, Asarfi Lal has been denied his rightful duties for about one year because of orders of education authorities and uncalled for litigation generated, it would be appropriate that Trilok Singh may be directed to pay a cost of Rs. 20,000/- to the petitioner within two months from today by way of bank draft. 10. An affidavit has also been filed on behalf of Maya Niranjan, Regional Joint Director of Education, Kanpur Region, Kanpur on 4th August, 2009, wherein it has been stated on her behalf that a mistake has been committed and the said mistake has been rectified by recalling her earlier order dated 27th May, 2009 vide order dated 29th July, 2009, which has been brought on record by means of the said affidavit as Annexure-A3. 11. The Regional Joint Director of Education was also a party in earlier writ petition No. 12960 of 2007 (Asharfi Lal v. State of U.P. and others) decided by this Court under judgment and order dated 30th April, 2007, wherein entire proceedings of direct recruitment were quashed, and that she was represented by the learned Standing Counsel. The order passed by her dated 27th May, 2009 not only lowered the esteem of the orders of this Court, it also resulted in interference with the administration of justice and virtually amount to criminal contempt. It also created a situation where uncalled for litigation has been generated causing loss of valuable time of the Court of law. 12. This Court therefore, while accepting the stand now taken by the Regional Joint Director of Education, directs that cost of Rs. 30,000/- be paid by the all three members of Regional Level Committee, who had passed the impugned order dated 27th May, 2009 within one month from the date a certified copy of this order is filed before the Regional Joint Director of Education, Kanpur Region, Kanpur through Account Payee Cheque to the petitioner. 13. In view of the fact that order dated 27th May, 2009 has been recalled, both the writ petitions have become infructuous and are accordingly dismissed as infructuous. However, the Regional Joint Director of Education is directed to pass appropriate orders qua the claim of the petitioner for promotion within four weeks. 13. In view of the fact that order dated 27th May, 2009 has been recalled, both the writ petitions have become infructuous and are accordingly dismissed as infructuous. However, the Regional Joint Director of Education is directed to pass appropriate orders qua the claim of the petitioner for promotion within four weeks. In case cost is not paid by Trilok Singh or the members of the Regional Level Committee as indicated above, the District Magistrate, Kanpur shall recover the same as arrears of land revenue within the same period. ————