Non-compliance with court orders can lead to contempt proceedings, emphasizing the necessity for adherence to judicial directives.

ORDER :

(RAJESH SHANKAR, J.)

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the deponent of the supplementary show cause affidavit dated 12^th February, 2025, namely, Ram Niwas Yadav is presently holding the post of Director, Higher Education, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi. Therefore, he may be permitted to add the deponent of the said supplementary show cause affidavit as opposite party no.4.

2. Permission is accorded.

3. Necessary insertion in the cause title of the present contempt case be made by the counsel for the petitioner in course of the day.

4. Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned A.C. to G.A.V, while referring to the letter no.213 dated 4^th February, 2025 issued by the opposite party no.4 to the opposite party no.3 (Annexure-A to the show cause affidavit dated 12^th February, 2025 filed) submits that in compliance of the order dated 21^st November, 2023 passed by this Court in W.P.(S) No.5153 of 2018, revised pay scale of the petitioner as per 5^th pay revision has been approved as Rs.2750-4400/- with effect from 1^st January, 1996. Accordingly, the pay scale of Rs.5200-20200 + Grade Pay of Rs.1800/- as per 6^th pay revision with effect from 1^st January, 2006 and the corresponding pay scale as per 7^th pay revision with effect from 1^st January, 2016 have been approved and communicated to the opposite party no.3 to do the further needful.

5. As against this, learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the relevant paragraphs of the rejoinder affidavit dated 25^th February, 2025 filed on behalf of the petitioner, which read as under:-

“6. That with regard to the statements made in para-6 to 9 of the supplementary show-cause, it is humbly stated and submitted that the pay fixation of the petitioner enclosed with letter dated 4.2.2025 as contained in Annexure-A to the said show-cause reveals that the petitioner’s pay fixation is made against the post of Lab. Boy, which is not as per the direction given by this Hon’ble Court in its order dated 21.11.2023 passed in W.P.(S) No.5153 of 2018.

7. That this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 21.11.2023 passed in W.P.(S) P.(S) No.5153 of 2018 has specifically directed the respondent no.3 (opposite party no.2 herein) to take appropriate decision with respect to fixation of pay scale of the petitioner against the suitable Class-III post within the time mentioned in the said order, besides other observations and directions given in the said order.

8. That it is humbly stated and submitted that the opposite party no.2 instead of complying with the order dated 21.11.2023 in its letter and spirit, is trying to mislead this Hon’ble Court by making fixation of pay of the petitioner against the post of Lab Boy which is not a Class-III post, rather it is a Class-IV post.

9. That in the aforesaid context petitioner is annexing some documents which would reveal that the post of Lab Boy is Class-IV post. In this regard petitioner is annexing a copy of provisional pay fixation dated 23.8.2011 of non-teaching Class- IV staff in revised scale of pay w.e.f. 01.01.1996 earlier made by the H.R.D. Higher Education Department, Government of Jharkhand wherein the petitioner’s name found place at serial no.1 showing his designation Lab Boy. The said pay fixation was already a subject matter of the writ application, as contained in Annexure-7 of the writ application and prayer for rectification of the same was made by the petitioner in the aforesaid writ application being W.P. (S) No.5153 of 2018. However, petitioner is annexing the same along with this affidavit for ready reference.”

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the supplementary show cause affidavit dated 12^th February, 2025 filed on behalf of the opposite party no.4 as well as the rejoinder affidavit dated 25^th February, 2025 filed on behalf of the petitioner and the content of letter no.213 dated 4^th February, 2025, this Court is of the view that by issuing the said letter, the said opposite party has tried to circumvent the aforesaid order