Court No. - 22 Case :- CONTEMPT No. - 1443 of 2004 Petitioner :- Dinesh Sharma And 3 Ors. Respondent :- R.K.Tiwari & Another. Petitioner Counsel :- I.M.Pandey Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Satyendra Singh Chauhan,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Perused the judgment passed in Writ Petition No.6240 (SS) of 1991, Jitendra
and others Vs. State of U.P. and others, dated 26.04.2000. From the said
judgment, it is apparent that the petitioners who were working up to 1988,
their case was taken into consideration and a direction was given to regularize
the services of those petitioners. This Court while disposing of the review
petition opined that if the petitioners of the present contempt petition are
similarly circumstanced, then their case may be considered and they will be
regularized and if the case of the petitioners is not similar, then their services
shall not be dispensed with only on the ground that they are not entitled to be
regularized. The opposite parties have found that the case of the petitioners is
not similar to the case of Jitendra and others and that is why they have
proceeded to cancel the regularization which was done illegally by some of
the officers of the department. It may be another thing that against the show
cause notice for cancellation, two petitioners have approached this Court and
interim order has been granted but so for the conduct of the opposite parties in
proceeding to cancel the appointment of two persons, namely, Harivansh Lal
and Rajveer Singh is concerned, the Court finds that the opposite parties were
justified and their appointments were rightly cancelled on account of the fact
that they were not similarly circumstanced in comparison to Jitendra and
others.
Services of the petitioners have not been dispensed with. They are still
continuing on daily wages basis. The opposite parties have considered the
case of the petitioners and rejected the same vide order dated 26.03.2006.
The Court finds that the opposite parties have committed no contempt. In the
facts and circumstances of the case, liberty is given to the petitioners to
challenge the aforesaid order before the appropriate forum. Merit and demerit
of the order cannot be looked into in these proceedings.
The contempt petition is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.1.2010
RBS/-