- (1.) Learned counsel for the parties are not present. The present Contempt Petition has been filed under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. It is, inter-alia, prayed that the opposite parties be punished for having committed contempt of this Court by allegedly flouting the order dated 4-10-1993 passed by this Court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 35278 of 1993 (Shri Hukum Singh Pharshwan Vs. Prabhagiya Logging Parbandhak, U.P. Ban Nigam, Pauri, District Pauri-Garhwal and others). Copy of the said order dated 4-10-1993 passed in the aforementioned Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 35278 of 1993 has been filed as Annexure 5 to the affidavit accompanying the Contempt Petition. The said order dated 4-10-1993 is reproduced below : "Petitioner shall take steps to serve respondents Nos. 1 to 3 personally in addition to normal mode of service within one week. Office shall issue notices returnable within six weeks. List this petition immediately after expiry of the aforesaid period. Meanwhile, petitioner shall be allowed to work on his post and shall be paid salary."
(2.) From a perusal of the said order dated 4-10-1993, it is evident that the said order is an interim order passed during the pendency of the aforementioned Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 35278 of 1993. By the order dated 17-5-1995, notices were directed to be issued to the opposite parties Nos. 1, 2 and 3 to show cause as to why each of them be not prosecuted for punishment for the alleged contempt of Court by flouting the said order dated 4-10-1993 passed in the aforementioned Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 35278 of 1993. The said order dated 17-5-1995 is as follows : "Heard. Perused the contempt petition, affidavit and its annexures. Duly considered the submissions. Since I find a prima facie case for the alleged Contempt of Court, hence it is ordered. Admit. Issue notice to respondents 1 to 3 calling upon each of them to appear in person on 8.8.95 or though the learned counsel stating all the facts on oath as to why each of them shall not be prosecuted for punishment for the alleged contempt of Court for flouting the order of this Hon'ble Court dated 4.10.93 passed in writ petition No. 35278 /93. Respondents are directed to make all endeavors to see that the Hon'ble Court's order is strictly complied with, if in the meantime, it has not been complied with."
(3.) In response to the notices issued pursuant to the said order dated 17-5-1995, the Opposite Parties Nos. 1, 2 and 3 put in appearance and filed their respective counter affidavits. Paragraph 8 of the counter affidavit, sworn on 23rd July, 1995, filed by the Opposite Party No. 1 (P.K. Dobhal), which is relevant in the present context, is reproduced below : "8. That since the stay vacation application filed in the Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 35278 of 1993, could not be taken up for disposal the Hon'ble Court could not be apprised of the correct position and the order dated 4-10-1993 could not be vacated. However, an application for dismissal of the writ petition having become infructuous has also been filed but that too could not be taken up." Similar averments have been made in paragraph 8 of the counter affidavit, sworn on 30th July, 1995, filed by G.S. Bagdwal (Opposite Party No. 2) as well as in paragraph 8 of the counter affidavit, sworn on 30th July, 1995, filed by R.C. Tiwari (Opposite Party No. 3). It further appears that by the order dated 2-9-1996 passed on Civil Misc. (Impleadment) Application No. 51994 of 1996, S.S. Sharma was impleaded as the Opposite Party No. 4. Pursuant to his having been impleaded as the Opposite Party No. 4 in the Contempt Petition, the said S.S. Sharma filed his counter affidavit, sworn on 8th November, 1996. Paragraph 8 of the said counter affidavit of S.S. Sharma, which is relevant in the present context, is quoted below : "8. That since the stay vacation application filed in the Civil Misc.Writ Petition No. 35278 of 1993, could not be taken up for disposal the Hon'ble Court could not be apprised of the correct position and the order dated 4-10-1993 could not be vacated. However, an application for dismissal of the writ petition having become infructuous, has also been filed but that too could not be taken up." From a perusal of the averments made in paragraph 8 of the respective counter affidavits filed by the Opposite Party Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4, it is evident that Stay Vacation Application had been filed in the aforementioned Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 35278 of 1993, and the same was pending. By the order dated 24th September, 2004, the Contempt Petition was directed to be listed along with the record of the aforementioned Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 35278 of 1993. Pursuant to the said order dated 24-9-2004, the Office has submitted its Report dated 16-12-2004/ 23-12-2004/ 3-1-2005. From a perusal of the said Office Report dated 16-12-2004 / 23-12-2004/3-1-2005 as well as the Report dated 15-12-2004 submitted by the Section Officer Writ-A, it is evident that the record of the aforementioned Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 35278 of 1993 has been sent to the Uttranchal High Court.;