MOHD SHAFIQ Vs. ANURADHA GUPTA. DIRECTOR SCHOOL EDUCATION
LAWS(J&K)-2020-2-65
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Decided on February 18,2020

Mohd Shafiq Appellant
VERSUS
Anuradha Gupta. Director School Education Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

KAPILDEO PRASAD SAH AND ORS. VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
M/S ASHOK PAPER KAMGAR UNION AND OTHERS VS. DHARAM GODHA [REFERRED TO]
NOOR SABA VS. ANOOP MISHRA [REFERRED TO]
SURESH ESTATE PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS VS. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Tashi Rabstan,J. - (1.)Present contempt petition has been filed for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents for non-compliance and disobedience of judgement dated 10.05.2018 passed in CPSW No.200/2017 (in SWP No. 1004/2015) on the grounds taken therein.
(2.)It may be noticed that against the directions passed by the learned Single Judge in different writ petitions for considering the claim of the petitioners for their appointment as Class-IV employees in the Education Department, the State-respondents went in appeal which was disposed of on 30.07.2009, the operative part of which is reproduced hereunder:
'In the circumstances, for all practical purposes, it must be deemed that by way of a policy decision, the State Government created 417 more posts and in those posts, by the order dated 04.04.2003 those 417 persons, who were permitted to work on temporary basis by the order dated 11.04.2002, were regularized. In consequence thereof, it must be deemed that there are still 417 posts available. The number of writ petitioners is less than 417. Accordingly, all of them can be accommodated. There will, therefore, be no occasion to take recourse to upsetting the orders of the Government dated 11.04.2002 and 04.04.2003.

In the circumstances, the exercise to be undertaken in terms of the judgment and order under appeal be completed within a period of six months from today and to that extent the judgment and order under appeal is modified with clarifications.'

(3.)Subsequently, the writ petitioners filed a writ petition, bearing SWP No.1004/2015, which came to be disposed of vide judgment dated 07.04.2015, whereby it is observed as under:-
'Learned counsel for the petitioners stated at the Bar that the petitioners would be satisfied in case the petition in hand is disposed of with a direction to the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to consider the case of the petitioners in light of order dated 03.11.2009 passed in APSWP No. 39/2009 in SWP No. 2607/2001.

His statement is taken on record.

At request, the petition in hand is taken up for final disposal and, as such, disposed of with a direction to the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to consider the claim of the petitioners in light of order dated 03.11.2009, passed in APSWP No. 39/2009 in SWP No. 2607/2001, referred to herein above, provided the same is applicable in the case in hand and pass appropriate consideration within a period of six weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is made available to them.'

;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.