Madhya Pradesh High Court
Union Of India vs Defence Civilian Dhobi And Barbers ... on 18 November, 2013
M.C.C. No.752/2013
18.11.2013
Smt. Kanak Gaharwar, learned counsel for the applicants.
Shri P. Bhatnagar, learned counsel for the respondent.
This application has been filed by the applicants seeking extension of time for compliance of the order dated 29.10.2003 passed in LPA No.346/2003 by which a Division Bench of this Court has held thus:
"By this appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent, the Defence Civilian Dhobi and Barbers Union has called in question the sustainability of the order dated 7.4.2003 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.3559/1994.
The facts lie in a small campass. The members of the aforesaid Union have been serving the second respond for last quarter of a century and an advertisement was published to fill up two posts in the category of Dhobi and four posts of Barbers, but the members of the appellant Union were not allowed to be appointed. A stand was taken before the learned Single Judge that there is no provision for relaxing the age. The learned Single Judge accepted the aforesaid submissions and disposed of the writ petition directing that the respondents would consider the cases of the members of the appellant Union by giving due weightage.
Having heard Shri Sameer Beohar, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri S.C.Sharma, learned Senior Advocate for the respondents, we are inclined to dispose of this LPA on the following terms and conditions:
(a) The advertisement issued by the respondents shall not be given effect to unique there is a scrutiny of persons, who are rendering services as Dhobis and Barbers to the second respondents.
(b) The concept of appointment engulf the factum of seniority and, therefore, the second respondents shall consider the senior persons first and thereafter may proceed to deal with cases of juniors.
(c) The experience rendered the Dhobis and Barbers, which is according to us, is practical and pragmatic and service oriented, should not be ignored and should be given due weightage in as much as they have loyally served the second respondent with any demur for almost 25 years.
(d) The respondents shall complete the aforesaid exercise within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this order."
Then an SLP was preferred before the Apex Court. Vide order dated 20.9.2012, the SLP was dismissed by the Apex Court. Thereafter, this application was filed on 18.6.2013 for seeking extension of time for compliance of the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in LPA No.346/2013.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the selection process has already been taken place on 15.11.2013 and the select list has been prepared. However, it requires approval of the higher authorities so the applicants are seeking three months time in this regard.
Prayer is opposed by the respondent. It is submitted that in the contempt case No.2125/2012, a Division Bench of this Court has allowed time till today for compliance of the order, failing which it was directed that the personal appearance of the respondent shall be directed. It is submitted that after passing of the order dated 4.10.2013 in Contempt Petition No.2125/2012, the applicants herein have taken initiative for the compliance of the order and they have not complied with the order in past, so no further time may be allowed.
We find that the matter is related to the year 2003 and the applicants herein were under obligation to give effect to the order forthwith but the aforesaid order was not given effect for considerable long time. Though it was submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that only in the year 2013, the vacancies were occurred so the process has already been initiated and prays for further time. But we find that the contempt proceedings are pending since 7.1.2013 and on 4.10.2013, the Division Bench have passed an order for compliance of the order dated 29.10.2013 passed in LPA No.346/2013. The aforesaid order has been complied with belatedly. However, considering the peculiar facts that the vacancies were occurred in the year 2013, we allow further fifteen days time from today for compliance of the order in its letter and spirit. Till 4th December, 2013, the applicants shall comply with the order passed in LPA No.346/2013 and for this purpose time period is extended. Compliance report be filed by the applicants in the Contempt Petition No.2125/2012 on or before 4.12.2013.
With the aforesaid directions, this MCC is finally disposed of. No order as to costs.
(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Subhash Kakade)
Actg. Chief Justice Judge
snb/-