Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 65 (JK)

O. N. Koul v. Mehboob Iqbal and others

2013-02-04

MANSOOR AHMAD MIR

body2013
1. The grievance projected in this contempt petition is that respondents have not complied with judgment dated 20.09.2011 passed in SWP No. 814/2010, thus, are in breach. 2. Respondents have filed statement of facts and contested the contempt petition on the ground that there is no breach on their part. 3. In order to marshal out as to whether respondents are in breach, it is necessary to reproduce order passed by this Court on 20.09.2011:- “For the reasons stated above, this petition is disposed of in the following manner:- 1. The respondents are directed to consider the claims of the petitioner and give him the same treatment as has been given to the persons, details whereof have been given in paras 6 and 7 of the writ petition, by giving him relaxation of less than four months in his experience; 2. The respondents will consider the case of the petitioner for regularization of his services as Chief Engineer and grant him consequential retiral benefits accordingly. But he shall not be given actual monetary benefits for the period he was in service. 3. The respondents after considering the claim of the petitioner shall take a decision within a period of eight weeks from the date, a copy of this order is served on them by the petitioner…..” 4. The respondents have stated that they have considered the case of the petitioner in terms whereof have passed consideration order dated 30.11.2011. In terms of direction No.1, respondents had to examine the case of the petitioner while keeping in view the details given in paras 6 and 7 of the writ petition and while considering the case of the petitioner with those persons who had also been given such benefits, which they have not done. 5. While going through the consideration Order No.472-PW(Hyd) of 2011 dated 30.11.2011, I am of the considered view that it is not mentioned in the said consideration order that respondents have considered the case of the petitioner in terms of direction No.1 passed in writ petition. 6. In the given circumstances, respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner afresh while keeping in view paras 6 and 7 of the writ petition within four weeks from the date copy of this order is served upon them and report compliance. 6. In the given circumstances, respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner afresh while keeping in view paras 6 and 7 of the writ petition within four weeks from the date copy of this order is served upon them and report compliance. Petitioner, if so advised, to hand over copy of petition with copies of its annexures to the respondents so as to facilitate early decision in the matter. 7. Disposed of along with connected CMA(s), if any.