- (1.) THE present appeal is preferred against the order dated 25.2.2013 passed in W.P. (S) No. 5035 of 2012 whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ with cost of Rs. 50,000/ - on the appellant and directed initiation of a proceeding under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 against the appellant by a separate proceeding. Brief facts: - -The appellant was appointed as a daily wager in Additional Primary Health Centre, Boarijore in 1985. Subsequently, the Selection Committee recommended the name of the appellant along with others for the appointment on the post and the appellant was appointed in Class -III posts of Surveillance Worker by the Civil Surgeon -cum -Chief Medical Officer, Godda vide Memo No. 1096 dated 31.12.1989 and was posted under the In -charge Medical Officer, Boarijore, Godda.
(2.) SUBSEQUENTLY , vide a Memo No. 310 dated 25.2.1991, the Civil Surgeon -cum -Chief Medical Officer terminated the service of the appellant and 51 other Class -III and Class -IV employees. Challenging the termination, the appellant filed a writ petition being C.W.J.C. No. 1848 of 2001 and the, same was dismissed by order dated 20.8.2001. Against the said order, the appellant preferred an appeal in L.P.A. No. 636 of 2001 and the said Letters Patent Appeal was dismissed by the Division Bench by order dated 14.5.2003. The appellant filed another writ petition being W.P. (S) No. 2156 of 2007 and the said writ petition was dismissed as not pressed. Stating that some other Class -IV employees whose services were terminated were ordered to be reinstated by the order of the Court in C.W.J.C. No. 2078 of 1991 and contending that the appellant is similarly situated to those Class -IV employees, the appellant has filed writ petition being W.P. (S) No. 5035 of 2012 which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge holding that: - - 7. ................... The writ petition, CWJC No. 1848 of 2001, filed by the petitioner with the same prayer, was dismissed by order dated 20th August, 2001. Against the said order, the petitioner had preferred appeal, being L.P.A. No. 636 of 2001. The said appeal was dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court by a well considered and elaborate order dated 14th May, 2003. In the said order, it was noticed that the termination order was given opportunity to defend........... 9. Considering the facts and the documents available on record, I find that the petitioner has filed this writ petition by suppressing the material facts with the same prayer which was rejected earlier in writ petition (W.P. (S) No. 1848 of 2001). The appeal filed against the said order, being LPA No. 636 of 2001, was also dismissed by a reasoned order. I, therefore, find substance in the submission of learned counsel for the respondents that the petitioner has a defiant attitude towards the Court's order and he is also guilty of suppressing the material facts and making misrepresentation before this Court.
(3.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents on record.;