Allahabad High Court
Yadram Singh,Foreman Govt. Iti Bijnore vs Mukesh Kumar Sharma,Principal Iti ... on 29 June, 2021
Author: Alok Mathur
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 16 Case :- CONTEMPT No. - 931 of 2021 Applicant :- Yadram Singh,Foreman Govt. Iti Bijnore Opposite Party :- Mukesh Kumar Sharma,Principal Iti Bijnore Counsel for Applicant :- Shivam Sharma Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard Sri Shivam learned counsel for applicant through video conferencing in view of COVID-19 pandemic.
2. Present contempt petition has been preferred for non-compliance of the order of this Court dated 28.08.2020 where the transfer of the applicant was stayed. Relevant portion of the said order quoted as under:-
"Meanwhile, the operation of the transfer order dated 6.3.2020 to the extent it relates to the petitioner, relieving order dated 30.5.2020 passed by opposite party No.3, Principal Government ITI, Bijnor as well as the order dated 10.7.2020 passed by the respondent No.2, Director, Directorate of Training and Employment, Government of U.P. Rozgar Bhawan, Lucknow, rejecting representation of petitioner, shall remain stayed. The petitioner shall be permitted to continue to function as Foreman and be paid salary for the said post at the place where he is working prior to passing of the impugned order of transfer."
3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for applicant that he had duly communicated the order of the High Court to the concerned authority for necessary compliance and by means of order dated 22.09.2020 he was permitted to join and it is undisputed that in pursuance of the order of the High Court he has joined and he is presently working on the post which he was working prior to the order of the transfer.
4. The grievance of the applicant in the present proceedings is that by means of the order dated 09.02.2021, an order has been passed asking the applicant to explain his absence from duty from 28.08.2020 till 20.09.2020. This is in light of the fact that the applicant after the order of the transfer had proceeded on medical leave and after passing of the interim order of this Court he had joined submitting a medical fitness certificate from 30.05.2020 to 27.08.2020.
5. It is submitted that if the order dated 09.02.2021 is taken to a logical conclusion then as per the applicant he would be denied his salary for the period from date of the order of the transfer till his joining.
6. Looking into the aforesaid controversy and the records, it is clear that in pursuance of the interim orders passed by this Court on 28.08.2020 whereby the transfer order was stayed, he has been permitted to join and is presently working on the post he held prior to his transfer.
7. In compliance thereof admittedly the petitioner has already permitted to join on 22.09.2020, therefore the interim order passed by this Court clearly has been complied with and it cannot be said that there is any disobedience of the same. Subsequently, it is also admitted that from the date of joining he has been given his salary. It is only for the period from the date of passing of the transfer order till joining of the applicant, the salary has not been paid and on account of the fact that the applicant has only submitted his medical certificate for a portion of the period he was on leave and not for the entire period and therefore by means of order dated 09.02.2021 the concerned authority has asked him to submit his application for leave for the remaining portion.
8. Considering the aforesaid, it is clear that the interim order staying the transfer has been substantially complied with, and no disobedience for the violation of the order of this Court is made out, consequently the present contempt petiton is without merits.
9. In case the applicant is not satisfied with the non-payment of salary for the portion he claims entitled for then the same can be duly considered and decided by the competent authority and if the applicant is still dis-satisfied he can approach the concerned court for clarification of the same in the pending writ petition or institute any other legal proceedings he may feel appropriate.
10. In light of the above, the present contempt petition is disposed of.
(Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 29.6.2021 Ravi/