Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
S.K.SAHOO, CHITTARANJAN DASH
Subhankari Das – Appellant
Versus
Sanjay Jaju, Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners challenge tribunal's order on regularization. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. previous tribunal decision on regularization supported. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. opposite parties complied with prior orders. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. challenge to contempt petition ruling due to procedural issues. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. notice issued for further proceedings. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
ORDER :
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).
2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 26.09.2025 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack (hereinafter "the Tribunal") in C.P. No.260/00069 of 2024 and for a direction to punish the opposite parties for committing the offence of contempt for deliverate, willful and intentional violation of the order passed by the learned Tribunal in O.A. No.163 of 2018, which has been confirmed by this Court vide judgment dated 02.11.2023 passed in W.P. (C) No.34332 of 2023 with a further direction to regularize the services of the petitioners from initial date of their joining in the respective posts with all consequential service benefits.
3. Mr. Mishra, lear
The court underscored that compliance with Tribunal orders for regularization should reflect the exact terms set forth in the initial ruling and not result in lateral or unauthorized posts.
The court reinforced the principle that long-serving temporary employees are entitled to regularization under specific legal frameworks, and non-compliance with court orders can lead to contempt proc....
The Court ruled that compliance with a Tribunal's order by passing a speaking order negates grounds for contempt, even if one applicant is excluded from benefits.
The court emphasized that willful and deliberate defiance of the order is pivotal in adjudicating contempt proceedings, and found that there was no deliberate or intentional disobedience in this case....
The court reinforced that compliance with its orders is mandatory, and failure to do so, despite prior admissions, constitutes contempt.
The court's power to punish for contempt is a safeguard for the functions of the judiciary, and willful violation of court orders constitutes contempt of court.
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
