- (1.) Heard Shri Ra.mji Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Vinod Kant, learned Senior Advocate/Additional Advocate General assisted by Shri D.N. Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite parties.
(2.) This contempt application has been filed alleging willful non compliance of the order dated 7.1.2002 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.4434 of 1992 (Vishok Kumar Vs. State of U.P.), which was affirmed by the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 30.10.2006 passed in Special Appeal No. 486 of 2002 as well as by the Apex Court vide order dated 11.9.2009 in Civil Appeal No. 6299 of 2009.
(3.) In order to appreciate the controversy in hand, it would be appropriate let the relevant extract of the order passed by the learned Single Judge may be reproduced hereinunder:- "On the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I find that there is an error apparent on record and thus the review application dated 22.01.1992 (annexure-9) passed by the Collector, Moradabad as communicated to the petitioner on 10.01.1992 by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chandausi, District Moradabad are quashed. Since the petitioner has not worked on the post and it is not know whether his temporary appointment could have in the circumstances converted itself into a permanent employment, it is provided that the petitioner shall be paid only half of the back wages to which he is entitled as seasonal collection amin. He is, however, entitled to seniority in service and shall be considered to be permanent appointment on the vacancy which may have arisen after his appointment. The petition is, accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs." ;