Pramath Patnaik, J. - (1.) The instant Contempt petition has been preferred by the petitioner for non-compliance of order dated 02.02.2017 passed in W.P. (S) No. 345 of 2017, whereby this Court while disposing of the writ application directed the respondents-authorities " to allow the petitioner four weeks' time to submit his reply on the enquiry report in the second show cause notice from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order", however, liberty was reserved with the respondents-authorities to pass appropriate order thereupon in accordance with law.
(2.) Heard Mr. Saibal Mitra, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after pronouncement of the judgment on 02.02.2017, the petitioner applied for certified copy of the order on the same date i.e. 02.02.2017 and got the same on 20.02.2017. It has further been submitted that petitioner has well in advance vide letter dated 02.02.2017 informed the Additional Chief Secretary-cumDisciplinary Authority regarding the order passed by this Court, but the Opposite Parties without waiting for the copy of impugned order and knowing the contents of the order, having full knowledge that order has been passed in favour of the petitioner and four weeks' time has been granted to give reply to second show cause notice to the petitioner, terminated the petitioner vide notification dated 15.02.2017 in utter violation of the order passed by this Court. However, the petitioner after getting the certified copy of order dated 02.02.2017 represented before the respondents-authorites to reinstate the petitioner in services revoking his termination. It has further been submitted that after the petitioner filed the present contempt petition, taking cognizance of the order passed by this Court in W.P. (S) No. 345 of 2017 dated 02.02.2017 Opposite Parties have withdrawn the order of termination dated 15.02.2017 vide notification dated 13.09.2017 and have given four weeks' time to file reply to second show cause. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court, the second show cause notice asking reply against proposed punishment is different from the second show cause asking reply against the enquiry report. In the case at hand, this Court has in unequivocal terms has given four weeks' time to the petitioner to reply against the enquiry reports but that order has been misread by the respondents-authorities and made themselves liable to be prosecuted under the relevant provisions of Contempt of Court Act.;