Back
Rajasthan High Court
Honble SUNIL KUMAR GARG, J.
Raj Kumar Birla - Appellant
Versus
S.N. Thanvi & Ors. - Respondents
S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 196 of 2001
Decided On : January 06, 2003
Every infraction of the Courts order does not amount to contempt of court. It is only willful and deliberate violation of courts order and condemnation conduct on the part of the contemner which is to be condemned in the contempt proceedings. The disobedience must be willful and not merely accidental and unintentional. (Para 13)
It can easily be said that the respondents have made compliance of the courts directions by issuing appropriate order in the shape of Annex. R/1/. By passing the orders Annex. R/1 by the respondents, there can be a case that the petitioner would have not been satisfied or it can be said that the said order passed by the respondents may not be in conformity with the directions issued by the Court, but in such matters, since a fresh cause of action has arisen, the action of the respondents cannot be regarded as wilful violation of the orders passed by this Court in writ petition nor it can be said that the respondents passed the orders Annex. R/1 in violation of the orders of this Court. (Para 15)
(2). The facts narrated in the contempt petition are as under:
(i) That the respondents issued an advertisement inviting applications for appointment on the post of Physical Training Instructor Grade III. In pursuance of the said advertisement, the petitioner submitted his application along with relevant particulars. After complete scrutiny of the documents, a provisional seniority list was issued in which name of the petitioner was placed at serial No.3.
(ii) That thereafter petitioner came to know that persons junior to him in the merit list had been offered appointment, but the petitioner was not given the appointment on the post of Physical Training Instructor Grade III.
(iii) That against the impugned action of the respondents in not giving appointment to the petitioner, the petitioner preferred a writ petition No. 979/99. This Court vide his order dtd. 13.12.2000 (Annex. 1) disposed of the writ petition with the following observations :
``They agreed that the petition is covered by decision of this Court reported in 1999 (2) RLR 131 and thus petition is liable to be disposed of in terms of that order. It is accordingly, disposed of.
(iv) For convenience operative portion of decision of this Court in the case of Ashok Kumar Sharma reported in (1992 (2) RLR 131) is quoted hereunder :
``For the reasons mentioned above, all the writ petitions are allowed with the direction that B.P. Ed. (3 years course) degree obtained by the petitioners from the recognized Universities as recognized by the UGC be considered as degree of graduation in Physical Education and all these petitioners shall be eligible for consideration for the said post along with other candidates who possess the graduate degree or equivalent to the graduate degree and the diploma in Physical Education. The respondents are directed to reconsider the cases of the petitioners as per the observations made above and prepare a merit list accordingly by treating them to be eligible for applying for the post of PTI Gr.II. and in case any of the petitioners is after consi- deration found to be on merit, they shall be entitled to the postings if any of the candidate less meritorious has been selected and in case the vacancies have already been filled up, in that situation, the petitioners would be offered the appointments after consideration in the vacancies which may be made available. No order as to costs.
(v) That further case of the petitioner is that he produced certified copy of order dt.13.12.2000 (Annx.1) before the respondents, but the respondents had shown scant regard to the order dt.13.12.2000 (Ann-ex.1) passed by this Court and did not give appointment to the petitio- ner. Hence, this contempt petition with the prayer as stated above.
(3). Reply to the contempt petition was filed by the respondents and their case is that since the petitioner was not possessing the requisite qualifications as were specifically mentioned in the advertisement (Annex. 5) to the writ petition), therefore, the petitioner was not entitled to get appointment on the post of Physical Training Instructor Grade III. It was further submitted by the respondents that the degree/diploma obtained by the petitioner was not from the Institution recognized by the National Council for Teacher Education as in the advertisement it was clearly stated that the candidate should possess the degree/diploma from such Institution which was recognized by the National Council for Teacher Education. The further case of the respondents is that the order dtd. 13.12.2000 (Annex. 1) passed by this Court was considered and by order dtd. 22.4.2002 (Annex. R/1), the petitioner was informed that he would not be appo
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
