- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing counsel and perused the record.
(2.) This contempt petition has been filed with the prayer for disobedience and non compliance of judgment and order dated 21.01.2010 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 222 (S/B) of 2004.
(3.) The operative portion of the judgment and order dated 21.01.2010 passed by the writ court is reproduced here below:- "Though we find that the contempt petition was barred by the limitation, the respondents appears to have refuse to implement the order and to give all consequential benefits including pay allowances and seniority to the petitioner on the ground that the Basic Shiksha Adhikari has filed an appeal against petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel has not able to provide any positive information in this regard. No appeal is maintainable against the judgment of the U.P. Public Service Tribunal. A writ petition is maintainable, but that the District Basic Education Officer appears to have either wrongly mentioned the number of the writ petition, or is under some wrong impression. It is admitted that the order of the tribunal dated 30.5.1997 was not stayed and thus the petitioner is entitled to all consequential benefits, of the order by which the suspension and departmental inquiry was quashed. The writ petition is consequentially allowed to the extent that the petitioner will be allowed all the consequential benefits, which has been deprived to him so far, subject to the result of any writ petition filed against the judgment. The order shall be complied within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before the respondent.";