JUDGMENT

Mrs. Sunita Agarwal, J.

This intra Court appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 25.04.2023 whereby the modification application filed in Writ-A No.4878 of 2021 has been allowed, clarifying the order dated 24.09.2021 for disposal of the said writ petition that the said order would not stand against the petitioner, inasmuch as, the penalty which has been awarded to the writ petitioner/applicant had been accepted. It was also held that the respondents/appellants herein while agreeing for amicable settlement leading to passing of the order dated 24.09.2021 had not only misinterpreted the said order, but proceeded to pass a fresh order taking into account the earlier infractions which were given quietus vide order dated 24.09.2021.

2. For the stand taken by the respondents/appellants herein in the counter affidavit in Writ Petition No.4492 of 2023, filed subsequently, it was held that the said stand of the respondents /appellants being contrary to the essence of the order dated 24.09.2021 would amount to contempt. The modification application has been disposed of by clarifying that the essence of the order dated 24.09.2021 was that the petitioner shall not be punished and the order impugned in the said writ petition shall stand wiped out except to the extent that the petitioner would have to suffer the stoppage of three increments and nothing more.

3. Sri Manish Goyal, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Avneesh Tripathi, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant-institution would submit that the learned Single Judge has gone beyond the scope of the application by which the modification of the judgment and order dated 24.09.2021 had been sought. It was argued that the statement in the counter affidavit filed in the subsequent writ petition could only be examined therein and, in no case, the statement made in the counter affidavit filed in subsequent petition could be taken as contempt of the order passed in the previous writ petition, that too based on the averments in the modification application, without even granting time to the appellant to file a reply to the same.

4. The facts of the matter placed before us, in brief, are that Writ Petition No.4878 of 2021 (previous writ petition) was filed with the relief of quashing of the recommendation dated 29.10.2020 of the Internal Committee, Institute of Technology, Kanpur under Section 13 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) (in short, 'the POSH Act, 2013'), as also the order dated 16.02.2021 passed by the appellate authority rejecting the appeal under Section 18 of the POSH Act, 2013. Further relief in the writ petition was to quash the entire inquiry report of the Internal Committee. The said writ petition was decided vide judgment and order dated 24.9.2021 after exchange of affidavits of the parties.

5. Amongst various grounds taken in the writ petition, it seems that during the course of argument, the Court had called upon the counsels for the parties to see as to whether any step can be taken for conciliation between the parties to give a quietus to the whole litigation. It is further noted in the judgment and order dated 24.09.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge disposing of writ petition No.4878 of 2021 that in terms of deliberations which took place during the course of hearing, the respondents/appellants herein had agreed to pass an order of withholding the increment for three years and such an order has already been passed on 13.09.2021. It was further noted that the order