M. Sharma, J. - (1.) THIS application for contempt of court has been filed by the Petitioner for non compliance of the judgment and order dated 8.9.88 passed by the Division Bench of the court in Civil Rule No. 241/79.
(2.) THE writ Petitioner in the said civil rule was the Branch Manager of one of the Insurance Companies (M/S Howrah Insurance Company Ltd.) Nagaon which ceased to exist after enactment of General insurance Business (Nationalization) Act, 1972. After the nationalization, the Petitioner was declared as Field Worker and thereafter promoted as Inspector Gr -II and then as Inspector Gr -I. In the writ petition the allegation was that he was categorized without jurisdiction as Field Worker by the Lower Management Service Committee appointed by the Chairman of the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. meant for the development staff as a consequence of which the Petitioner being placed at the bottom of the development staff of the business suffered both in pay benefit as well as an promotion. As his representation had not been attended to by the concerned Respondents he filed the writ petition being Civil Rule No. 241/79 and this Court by judgment dated 8.9.88 directed the Respondents to reconsider the Petitioner 's categorization and expressed court's view that the Petitioner may be considered at least as a Junior Officer as the court was not inclined to issue mandamus and refer the matter for reconsideration of the Respondents. After this judgment the writ Petitioner issued notices to the Respondents condemners for compliance of the order. Alleging that the Petitioner's case was not considered as per direction of this Court, the Petitioner filed petition praying before the court to draw in appropriate contempt proceeding against the condemners for their wilful deify and latches in reconsidering the categorization of the Petitioner. The condemners filed affidavit countering the allegations of willful disobedience of the order of the court. In defence of their stand the condemners contended that on the nationalization of the General Insurance Business the General Insurance Corporation of India and its four subsidiary companies, namely, Oriental insurance Company Ltd., National Insurance Company Ltd., United India Insurance Company Ltd. and New India Assurance Company Ltd. were formed taking in their folds the various Insurance Companies in existence prior to such nationalization. After such nationalization by notification dated 8th May, 1972 a Committee was appointed called "General Insurance Service Integration Committee (sic) known as "Mathrani Committee" and he said committee submitted (sic) in respect of categorization of employees only at the senior most (sic) for and the lower category employees the Board of Directors of the Corporation (sic) meeting held on 27th May, 1974 passed resolution constituting a (sic) service Committee" for each of its subsidiary companies to (sic) of persons suitable to hold the post at the Lower Management (sic) make provisional appointments and to prepare provisional (sic) but not authorized to categories the incumbent as an (sic) of the development staff. Accordingly under the said process (sic) as member of the development staff on the basis of (sic) this Petitioner preferred appeal before the (sic) the purpose but the same was rejected. This aspect was placed before the writ court at the time of hearing and considering this, this Court held as follows: As a writ court we cannot decide to which category of officers the Petitioner belongs and to direct the Respondents to categories the Petitioner as such. We can only direct the appropriate authority to reconsider the question of categorization of the Petitioner. It is further held that we may further state that according to us the claim of the Petitioner to categories him at least as a Junior Officer has appeared as justified and so we hope he would be classified at least as Junior Officer inasmuch as the Petitioner could not have been reasonably regarded to belong to Class -II cadre of development staff.
(3.) APPARENTLY the Respondents constituted a committee to consider the Petitioner 's case as per direction of the said judgment. A committee was constituted for the purpose and Petitioner was heard at length and the earlier decision of categorization of the Petitioner had been upheld on the reasons given in the report of categorization committee (Annexure -III to the show cause reply of the Respondents).;