A.Kabir, J. - (1.) This contempt application arises out of the order dated 10th September, 1998, passed by me on the writ application filed by the petitioners herein disposing of the same with certain directions for absorption of the writ petitioners in Group-D posts under the respondents.
(2.) When the contempt application was moved, it had been submitted on behalf of the alleged contemnors/opposite parties that an appeal had been preferred by the respondents against the aforesaid order, together with an application under section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of the delay in filing the appeal. Since then, the application for condonation of delay has been allowed, and an application for stay of the order appeal against is pending decision.
(3.) Appearing on behalf of the alleged contemnors/opposite parties, Mr. Rathin Das took a preliminary objection as to whether the contempt proceedings should be continued with during the pendency of the appeal and the stay application filed therein. Mr. Das urged that in the instant case the very purpose of filing the appeal would be rendered meaningless and the appeal and the stay application would become infractuous if the writ petitioners were allowed to enforce the order appealed against before the stay application could be heard out.;