Madhya Pradesh High Court
Nisha Tiwari vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr on 23 June, 2017
1
W.P.6630/2016
23.06.2017
Shri S.K. Sharma, learned counsel for the
petitioner.
Ms. Sudha Shrivastava, learned Sudha
Shrivastava for respondents/State.
Petitioner's grievance is that vide order dated 20.08.2015 passed in W.P.No.7821/2012 this Court had directed reinstatement of the petitioner with all consequential benefits. In violation of such order of the High Court, impugned order Annexure P-1 has been issued by Sub-Divisional Officer, Ambah namely Dinesh Chandra Sindhi reinstating the petitioner without back wages.
A reply has been filed under the signature of Collector, Morena in which it is mentioned that since there was no specific order for grant of back wages, the petitioner has been reinstated with all consequential benefits, i.e., length of service, notional pay fixation of salary and seniority but for the period she was out of employment, she cannot be paid wages. Secondly, petitioner submitted her affidavit forgoing her claim of back wages, and, therefore, without challenging the order dated 20.08.2015, the respondents reinstated her.
In the affidavit, it is clearly mentioned that her financial condition being precarious, she requires service most urgently. Therefore, it is apparent that respondents were not authorized to exploit 2 W.P.6630/2016 disadvantaged position of the petitioner by obtaining an affidavit so to flout the orders of this High Court passed in W.P. No.7821/2012.
Accordingly, it appears to be prima facie a case of deliberate and willful non-compliance of the orders of the High Court by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Ambah.
Issue notice to Shri Dinesh Chandra Sindhi, Sub- Divisional Officer, Ambah as to why contempt proceedings may not be drawn against him for deliberate and willful disobedience of the orders of the High Court, on payment of process fee within seven days, returnable within four weeks.
(Vivek Agarwal)
Ashish* Judge