- (1.) This application is directed against the order dated 27.7.2000 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, in C.P.C. No. 21 of 2000 with M.A. No. 329 of 2000 whereby and whereunder the learned Tribunal while considering the affidavit filed by the respondent No. 1 before it, inter alia, came to the conclusion that he had complied with the order as per his own perception and the same cannot constitute a contempt requiring drawing up of proceeding under the Contempt of Courts Act. However, it was observed:- "7. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the disciplinary authority has in the meantime passed the final order in the D.A. proceeding on 4.7.2000, ex parte, and this order has been brought oh record by filling a supplementary petition filed on 13.7.2000. By the said order, the applicant has been removed from service. 8. After considering all aspects of the matter, we are of the view that when the final order has been passed, the applicant should file appropriate statutory appeal as per rules and if he is aggrieved by the appellate order, he will be free to agitate the matter afresh."
(2.) No exception to the aforementioned finding can be taken.
(3.) The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Tribunal has failed to consider the contumacious acts on the part of the contemner No. 2 who was the disciplinary authority as also the respondent No. 6 and other contemners who are the members of the Board of Enquiry are also guilty of wilful violation of the order of the learned Tribunal dated 6.1.2000.;