Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Uttarakhand High Court

CLCON/350/2019 on 15 October, 2019

Author: Manoj K. Tiwari

Bench: Manoj K. Tiwari

CLCON No. 350 of 2019
Hon'ble Manoj K. Tiwari, J.

Mr. Yogesh Pacholia, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sandeep Tiwari, Advocate for opposite party.

Heard learned counsel for the parties. Writ Petition (S/B) No. 217 of 2016 filed by the petitioner was disposed of by Division Bench of this Court with a direction to the Director, Aryabhatta Research Institute of Observational Sciences (ARIES) to examine the reports of Internal and External Screening Committees and take a considered decision on whether or not the recommendations of the External Screening Committee should be accepted with a further direction to the Director to communicate his decision to the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

In the contempt petition, it has been alleged that the order passed by Division bench of this Court has been willfully violated.

A compliance affidavit has been filed by Dr. Wahab Uddin, Director Incharge, ARIES. In para no. 4 of the compliance affidavit, it has been stated that order of this Court has been complied with vide order dated 25.07.2019. Copy of the order dated 25.07.2019 is brought on record as Annexure-1 to the compliance affidavit.

A perusal of the said order indicates that Incharge Director have expressed his agreement with the observation made by the External Screening Committee, whereby decision on petitioner's promotion under Modified Flexible Complementing Scheme was deferred.

Since the Incharge Director has taken a decision as directed by this Court, therefore no case for punishing the Incharge Director under Contempt of Courts Act is made out.

Accordingly, the contempt petition is closed. Contempt notice issued against opposite party is hereby discharged.

However, petitioner shall be at liberty to approach the appropriate forum for redressal of his grievance, if any.

                                 (Manoj K. Tiwari, J.)
Navin                                 15.10.2019