Sardar Singh And Others v. Anirudh Tewari And Another

COCP-578-2020 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

Contempt of Court Petition No.578 of 2020 (O&M) Date of Decision: February 12, 2020 Sardar Singh and others ......PETITIONER(s).

VERSUS

Anirudh Tewari and another ....RESPONDENT(s).

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

Present:

Mr. Parveen Kumar Garg, Advocate for the petitioner (s).

******* SURINDER GUPTA, J.

Vide order dated 29.02.2012 passed in CWP-15199-2003, directions were issued to the respondents to assign the petitioners deemed date of adjustment, subject to their eligibility, prior to a date when their immediate juniors were so adjusted with notional service benefits. The relief as ordered, has been allowed to the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners has now raised a plea that after giving the deemed date of adjustment and notional service benefits, petitioners are also entitled to claim seniority as per the deemed date of adjustment even if that relief is not specifically allowed to them. Earlier contempt petition (CWP-3075-2017) filed by the petitioners was withdrawn on 16.08.2019, wherein it was ordered as follows:- "Learned counsel for the petitioner states that SACHIN MEHTA 2020.02.12 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

COCP-578-2020 -2order has been passed and no cause of action survives for pursuing the contempt petition. However, learned counsel for petitioner seeks liberty that in case still there is any grievance, the petitioner would avail the remedy in accordance with law against the order passed. In view of the above, petition is disposed of as infructuous with liberty as aforesaid. Rule issued against respondents is discharged."

As per the above order, petitioners were allowed the liberty to avail other legal remedies available to them and the contempt petition was dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. In view of the above order, I find no reason to initiate contempt proceedings against the respondents by reviewing the earlier order. This petition has no merits.

Dismissed.

However, the petitioners are at liberty to avail other legal remedies available to them.

( SURINDER GUPTA ) February 12, 2020 JUDGE Sachin M.

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No SACHIN MEHTA 2020.02.12 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh