Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
P S Sastry vs Dr M Nair Rajeevan &Amp; Ors on 16 August, 2019
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH
CP No.611/2018 in
OA No. 1287/2018
New Delhi, this the 16th day of August, 2019
Hon'ble Mr. Justice L. Narasimha Reddy, Chairman
Hon'ble Mr. Mohd. Jamshed, Member (A)
1. P.S. Sastry, Meteorologist -'B'
Age 59 years
S/o late P.L.N. Sastry
R/o 229, A-Type Quarter
Pandara Road Flats,
New Delhi - 110 003 .
2. Pratap Kumar Jena, Meteorologist -'B'
Age 50 years
S/o Shri Harekrishna Jena
R/o G-1/126, Vaishali
Ghaziabad, UP-201010.
3. Atul Kumar Mishra, Meteorologist -'A'
Age 53 years
S/o Shri Manik Raj Mishra
R/o 79-M, CGH Complex, Vasant Vihar
New Delhi - 110 057.
4. Anil Kumar Pandey, Meteorologist-'A'
Age 50 years
S/o Shri Ram Pujan Pandey
R/o G-40, First Floor, Sakarpur
Delhi - 110 092 .
5. Sumesh Chand Verma, Meteorologist-'A'
Age 47 years
S/o Shri Maamchand
R/o M-66/A, Meteorological Housing Complex
IMD Campus, Lodhi Road,
New Delhi - 110 003.
6. Prashant Saraswat, Sc. Asstt.
Age 44 years
S/o Shri B.S. Saraswat
R/o B-11 A, East Baldev Park
Delhi - 110 051.
2
CP No.611/2018 in OA No.1287/2018
7. Abhishek Kumar Rai, Sc. Asstt.
Age 31 years
S/o Shri Om Prakash Rai
R/o M-09, IMD Residential Complex
Plot No.6 B, Dwarka Sector 10
New Delhi - 110 075.
.. Applicants
(By Advocate : Shri M K Bhardwaj)
Versus
1. Dr. M. Nair Rajeevan,
Secretary
Ministry of Earth Sciences
Prithvi Bhavan, Lodhi Road
New Delhi - 110 003.
2. Dr. K.J. Ramesh,
Director General of Meteorology
India Meteorological Department
Mausam Bhawan, Lodhi Road
New Delhi - 110 003.
3. Shri Gajendra Kumar,
Dy. Director General of Meteorology
(Administration)
India Meteorological Department
Mausam Bhawan, Lodhi Road
New Delhi - 110 003.
..Respondents
(By Advocate : Shri Hanu Bhaskar)
O R D E R (ORAL)
Justice L. Narasimha Reddy, Chairman This Contempt Petition is filed alleging that the respondents did not implement the order dated 28.03.2018 passed in O.A. 1287/2018.
3
CP No.611/2018 in OA No.1287/2018
2. Today itself, we allowed the R.A. No.227/2018, filed by the respondents and modified the order dated 28.03.2018 passed in O.A. No.1287/2018. A totally different picture altogether has emerged. The respondents are required to take steps, in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jarnail Singh & Others vs. Lachhmi Narayan Gupta & Others, (2018) 11 SCALE 530.
3. Therefore, the Contempt Petition is closed. However, it is left open to the applicants to pursue the remedies, in accordance with law, in case the respondents fail to comply with the orders passed in R.A. No.227/2018. There shall be no order as to costs.
(Mohd. Jamshed) (Justice L. Narasimha Reddy) Member (A) Chairman /jyoti/