IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Najmi Waziri, J.
Nidhi Malik - Appellant
Versus
Alapan Bandyopadhyay - Respondent
CONT.CAS(C) 293 of 2021
Decided On : 12-10-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks contempt proceedings against respondent for non-compliance. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. respondent argues compliance with prior order; claims legitimate reasons. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. court emphasizes duty of compliance with prior orders. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. non-compliance undermines rule of law and court authority. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. petitioner granted relief; respondent to act accordingly. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
JUDGMENT
Najmi Waziri, J. This contempt petition has been filed by the petitioner under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India, 1949, seeking, inter alia, the following reliefs:-
"(i) Initiate contempt proceedings against the alleged contemnor for willfully and deliberately disobeying the judgment and Order dated 06.01.2021 of this Hon'ble Court passed in the W.P.(C) No.10874 of 2020 and further direct the Respondent to pass a fresh order in compliance of the said Order;"
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 06.01.2021 passed by the Division Bench in W.P.(C) No. 10874/2020 leaves no scope for the State of West Bengal to consider the matter on merits but to issue a release order in view of the two orders as mentioned by the Division Bench in its aforesaid order, which is reproduced as under:
"...Present writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:
"1. Allow the present Petition and pass an appropriate writ, order or direction to set aside the impugned Order dated 01.12.2020 passed by the Ld. Central Administrative, Principal bench, New Delhi in MA/100/2252/2020;
2. Consequently, direct that the prayer (s) made in the Original Application of the Petitioner as filed before the Ld. CAT, Principal bench, New Delhi be allowed;
3. Consequently, direct the Respondent no. 1 to grant No objection/approval to the Petitioner for transfer of her cadre from West Bengal cadre to AGMUT Cadre and accordingly direct for passing of relieving orders in favour of the petitioner in a time bound manner;
4. Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice."
2. However, after some arguments, learned counsel for petitioner confines his prayer to prayer (ii) made in the OA filed along with M.A.No. 100/2252/2020. The said prayer clause is reproduced hereinbelow:-
(ii.) In the alternative, issue an appropriate order directing the Respondent no. 2 to act on the Application of the Applicant dated 10.08.2020 (Annexure A-18) and grant consent/letter of No objection and consequential relieving order for the Transfer of cadre of the Applicant from West Bengal cadre to AGMUT Cadre;
3. Issue notice.
4. Mr. Vijay Joshi, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 1 and Ms. Madhumita Bhattarcharjee, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 2.
5. They state that in view of the limited prayer now sought before this Court, they do not wish to file any counter affidavit.
6. It is pertinent to mention that the Tribunal by way of the impugned order has dismissed the petitioner's O.A. on the ground of delay as far as challenge to order dated 25th May, 2016 of the respondent No.2 is concerned. However, the petitioner had been given liberty to pursue her fresh application seeking transfer of the cadre.
7. Keeping in view the aforesaid, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 2 to decide the petitioner's second representation dated 10th August, 2020 within eight weeks in accordance with the order dated 06th November, 2019 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Principal Bench in O.A.3863/2018 as well as order dated 04th December, 2020 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Principal Bench in O.A. No.3579/2019 and the judgment and order dated 03rd February, 2020 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 13444/2020.
8. It is clarified that the dismissal of the petitio
Point of Law : when an order made for the benefit of a party is disregarded or violated and the Court enforces the order by punishing the delinquent for contempt, it is said that such proceedings is ....
The court affirmed that a State's refusal to grant a no-objection for inter-cadre transfers must be based on cogent reasons and not unsupported claims, recognizing the significance of family rights u....
Point of Law : Inter cadre transfer – Marital grounds - when the State unreasonably denies a request of an employee seeking inter-cadre transfer, it impinges upon such person’s right to demand respec....
Inter-cadre transfers based on marital grounds should be prioritized, and administrative reasons like officer shortages cannot justify denials, divesting officers of family rights.
Inaction by parent cadre on inter-cadre transfer request for spouse co-location, despite receiving cadre consent, is unjustified; officer shortage not valid to delay indefinitely; time-bound NOC, tra....
Judicial authority must be respected; failure to comply with Tribunal orders results in administrative contempt and can have significant implications for the affected employee.
Inter-cadre transfer requests based on spousal grounds must be honored, and reasons such as officer shortages are insufficient to deny such requests under constitutional rights to family life.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the transfer order violated the petitioner's fundamental right to equality before the law.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.