CHANDRASHEKHAR,J. - (1.) On 06.12.2019, the following order was passed by this Court: This contempt case has been filed for initiating a proceeding under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 against the contemnors for their willful violation of the order dated 25.07.2018 passed in W.P.(S) No. 5158 of 2017 and batch cases. In paragraph no. 9 of the order dated 25.07.2018, the writ Court has ordered as under: "On account of illegal termination of the petitioners from service, in my opinion, they cannot be denied benefits of continuity in service. On their reinstatement in service they shall be deemed to be continuing in service with effect from their initial date of appointment and whole of this period shall be included in their service. On payment of salary to the petitioners for the period during which they have been kept out of service, contention raised is that atleast 25% back-wages may be granted to the petitioners. On admitted facts, an inference that the petitioners have been prevented from discharging their duty can be justifiably drawn from the date of decision in the aforesaid Letters Patent Appeals. After 11.05.2018 when the order passed in W.P.(S) No. 6031 of 2015 and W.P.(S) No. 173 of 2016 was set-aside by the Hon'ble Division Bench, the petitioners were entitled for reinstatement in service and accordingly, it is ordered that they are entitled for salary between 12.05.2018 till they are actually reinstated in service." This contempt case was listed on 27.09.2019. On that day, the learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the undertaking tendered by the contemnors in Contempt Case (Civil) Nos. 781 of 2018 and 789 of 2018 to show that accepting the undertaking tendered by the opposite parties- contemnors, the contempt cases were disposed of. Now, in the present proceeding, a show-cause reply has been filed by the Principal Secretary, School Education and Literacy Department. In this affidavit it is stated that the order passed by the writ Court has been complied substantially and only that part of the order by which back-wage to the tune of 25% has been granted to the petitioners has been challenged in L.P.A No. 793 of 2018. Mr. Rishikesh Giri, the learned State counsel submits that the previous contempt cases were disposed of vide order dated 15.02.2019, however, before that L.P.A No. 793 of 2018 was already filed on 22.12.2018, but, this fact was not brought to the notice of the writ Court. Mr. Piyush Chitresh, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that L.P.A No. 793 of 2018 which was filed in December, 2018 has remained in defects for a considerable time and no step was taken by the State of Jharkhand for hearing of L.P.A No. 793 of 2018, however, Mr. Rishikesh Giri, the learned State counsel submits that the defects pointed out by the Registry have now been removed and, in fact, the Letters Patent Appeal was posted for hearing on 02.12.2019 and now it is posted for hearing on 09.12.2019. Post this matter on 13.12.2019.
(2.) Thereafter, it was brought to the notice of the Court that the Letters Patent Appeal preferred by the State was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court.
(3.) On 13.12.2019, the following order was passed by this Court: The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on 10.12.2019 the Letters Patent Appeal filed by the State has been dismissed. Mr. Rishikesh Giri, the learned State counsel seeks adjournment for filing affidavit in compliance of the order of this Court. It needs no reiteration that this is second round of the contempt proceeding; the first contempt case filed by the petitioner was disposed of on the basis of the undertaking filed by the State. Post the matter on 10.01.2020. ;