Back
2015 Supreme(J&K) 477
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
Hasnain Massodi and B.S. Walia, JJ.
Savita Gupta and Ors. – Appellants
Vs.
Sarita Chouhan and Ors. – Respondent
Contempt (LPA) No. 5 of 2010 & LPASW No. 173 of 2006 & MP Nos. 1, 15, 17 of 2015
Decided On : 28-09-2015
For the Appellant :Ajay Abrol, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Gagan Basotra, Advocate.
Compliance with court judgments and entitlement to benefits and promotions must be in accordance with the relevant rules and regulations.
Headnote:
Compliance - Government Orders - Jammu and Kashmir Education (Gazetted) College Service Recruitment Rules, 1995 - 1978 Government Decision - LPASW No. 173/2006 - SWP No. 1051-A/98 - SRO 423 of 2008 - SRO 240 of 1979 - SRO 291 of 1978 - Government Order No. 157/HE of 2015 - Government Order No. 136-HE of 2013 - Government Order No. 135-HE of 2015 - Government Order No. 458-HE of 2011 - Government Order No. 140-HE of 1987 - SRO 291 of 1978
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought compliance with a judgment passed by the Division Bench, claiming entitlement to various benefits and promotions.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the respondents had complied with the directions of the judgment by issuing various government orders and promotions in accordance with the relevant rules and regulations.
Issues: Compliance with judgment, entitlement to promotions and benefits, interpretation of relevant government orders and rules.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the respondents had complied with the judgment by issuing government orders and promotions in accordance with the relevant rules and regulations, rejecting the petitioners' claims for various benefits and promotions based on their ineligibility and lack of compliance with the applicable rules.
Final Decision: The court discharged the Rule issued and dismissed the contempt petition, stating that the respondents had complied with the directions of the judgment, and allowed the petitioners to seek redress through legal remedies if aggrieved.
B.S. Walia, J.
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that SWP No. 1051-A/98 was allowed by the learned Single Judge vide judgment/order dated 05.03.2004, against which the respondents preferred LPASW No. 173/2006. Operative part of the order dated 03.03.2009 passed on the same is as under:-
"Accordingly we allow the appeal, and set aside the judgment and order under appeal, but at the same time, allow the writ petition with a direction upon the appellants to consider the following claims of the writ petitioners-respondents in accordance with law:-
(i) Claim of the writ petitioners-respondent Nos. 1 and 3 to receive salaries payable to Chief Librarian until the said post remained and, thereupon the salaries payable to the Librarian;
(ii) The contention of the petitioners-respondent Nos. 1 and 3 that by reason of continuous discharge of duties of Chief Librarian and thereupon Librarians for last 20 years, in law, it must be deemed that they are holding the post included in the cadre of service known as the Jammu and Kashmir Education (Gazetted) College Service Recruitment Rules, 1995;
(iii) In the event, they are not holding posts included in the cadre of the said service, their right to be regularised in a post in the said service in view of discharge of duties by them attached to the subject posts far in excess of twenty years in accordance with any order or other decisions of the Government;
(iv) The claim that the petitioners-respondents are entitled to higher scale of pay upon acquiring qualification and experience mentioned in the Government decision of 1978;
(v) Lastly, whether they are similarly placed as that of the persons dealt with by the order of the Government dated 10th March, 1987 and, if so, whether they are entitled to the benefits to be accorded to them from the date those persons were accorded the benefits by the said order."
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondents had not implemented the judgment passed by the Division Bench, therefore they were liable to be prosecuted and punished. On the other hand respondents have vehemently disputed non compliance by referring to the compliance report filed by the Commissioner/Secretary, Higher Education, Civil Secretariat, Srinagar stating therein that Government Order No. 135-HE of 2015, dated 15.04.2015 was passed to implement the orders passed by the High Court in the contempt petition whereafter in furtherance of orders of this Court dated 29.04.2015, order Annexure R-3 dated 15.05.2015 was passed by the respondents for complying with the directions of the Division Bench of this Court dated 03.03.2009 in LPASW No. 173/2006. It is also the stand of the respondents that in furtherance of Government Order No. 157/HE of 2015 dated 15.05.2015, Government Order No. 136-HE of 2013 dated 14.10.2013 and Government Order No. 135-HE of 2015 dated 15.04.2015 had been recalled due to the reasons stated in the aforementioned Government Order and the petitioners' case rejected. Petitioners' claim for parity with Mrs. Kamlesh Sharma and Mrs. Zahida Gulgam has been denied on the ground that they were not similarly situated as the aforementioned employees as the said employees had rendered more than 25 years and 14 years of service respectively and thereafter were substantively promoted as Librarian (Non-gazetted) after having acquired the requisite qualification and that their subsequent promotion as Chief Librarian was in their personal capacity on the recommendations of the Screening Committee vide Government Order No. 140-HE of 1987 dated 10.03.1987 under the provisions of SRO 291 of 1978, but the same was not in accordance with law as the said SRO 291 of 1978 was not in force at the relevant time, therefore, one wrong could not be said to be conferring any right to seek perpetuation of the wrong again especially since there were other similarly situated employees who would claim the same benefit which would result in opening of a Pandora's Bo
