T.S.Misra, J. - (1.) Shanker Bux Singh, the present applicant was an employee of Avas Evam Vikas Parishad. His services were terminated by an order dated 4th June, 1981 wherein it was written that instead of one month's notice one month's salary shall be payable to him. That order was served on the present applicant on 11th June, 1981. It has been said in the counter-affidavit filed in this case that the applicant was paid a sum of Rs. 640.70 by cheque towards Ids one month's salary in lieu of one month's notice. This fact has not been denied by the applicant in his rejoinder-affidavit. On the other hand, it has been said by the applicant that the cheque delivered to him was not cashed by him.
(2.) The present applicant filed a writ petition No. 2957 of 1981 in this court seeking the quashing of the order dated, 4th June, 1981 whereby his services had been terminated. On his application for interim relief an order was passed by a learned single Judge of this Court on 23rd June, 1981 in the following terms: "List along with the writ petition. Till 10th of July, 1981 the operation of the impugned order dated 4-6-1981 contained in Annexure No. 3 shall remain stayed. Sd/23- 6-81 Again on 17th July, 1981 the application for interim relief was placed before the court for further orders and the following order was passed: The learned Chief Standing Counsel prays for and is allowed two weeks' fur-!her time to file counter-affidavit. Let the counter-affidavit be filed by 31-7-1981. The operation of the impugned order elated 4-6-1981 shall remain stayed till 31-7-1981. List on that date. The stay application was again placed before the court on 31st July, 1981, when the following order was passed: No counter-affidavit has been filed. The operation of the impugned order dated 4-6-1981 shall remain stayed until further orders. The applicant has contended, that he gave an application daled 2nd July, 1981 along with the certified copy of the stay order dated 23rd June, 1981 in the office of the Superintendent of Works DCU, Varanasi and the receipt clerk, Sri Ram Narain, received the said application and, the Superintendent of Works, DCU, Vara-nasi forwarded the same to the opposite party along with the letter dated 2nd July, 1981 which was received by the office of opposite-party on 7th July, 1981. He again gave an application on 4th August, 1981 with the certified copies of the stay orders dated 17th July, 1981 and 31st July, 1981 which were received by the receipt clerk of the office opposite party. His further contention is that on 11th June, 1981 he had, applied for leave for two weeks and it is on that very date that the office in charge of the office of Superintendent of Works gave him the letter dated 11th June, 1981. On these facts the applicant has, therefore, contended that the opposite party who is Avas Ayukt, U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad, Lucknow has committed contempt of court because he has disobeyed the aforesaid orders passed by this court in the said writ petition. 2. The petition has been opposed, and the opposite party has filed the return and his counter-affidavit. A rejoinder-affidavit has also been filed. It has been submitted in the counter-affidavit that an application was moved before this court on 17th Sept. 1981 seeking clarification of the stay order and also praying that the said stay order be vacated. Another application to the same effect was moved, on 9th November, 1981 and when no order were passed on both the aforesaid applications, a third application was moved on 11th February, 1982. Ultimately all these three applications were heard together and the interim stay order was vacated by this court on 5th April, 1982. The opposite-party has hence contended that he has not disobeyed any order passed, by this court and had in fact never intended to disobey the same. Further, it has been stated in the counter-affidavit that since the order dated 4th June, 1981 had been implemented and the applicant was not in the employment of the Board and in the interim orders passed by this court there was no direction to the opposite party for reinstatement of the applicant or for payment of salary. Therefore, applications for vacation of the interim orders as well as for clarification and modification of the interim orders had been moved.
(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the affidavit, counter-affidavit and the rejoinder-affidavit. I have also perused the aforesaid; interim orders passed by this Court in the said, writ petition.;