- (1.) The petitioners have filed this contempt petition seeking initiation of a proceeding under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 against the contemnors for willful and intentional violation of the order dated 25.07.2018 passed in W.P(S)No.5158 of 2017 and batch cases and for willfully flouting and not honouring their undertaking tendered before this Court in the proceeding of the Contempt Case (Civil) No.781 of 2018 and Contempt Case (Civil) No.789 of 2018 which were disposed of accepting the undertaking tendered by the opposite parties-contemnors.
(2.) The controversy which was ignited on account of termination of Para Teachers who were allegedly wrongly appointed under non-Para Teacher category was set at rest by a decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A No.186 of 2017 and L.P.A No.191 of 2017.
(3.) The brief facts of the cases in W.P (S) No.5158 of 2017 and batch cases are briefly recorded in paragraph nos.5, 6 and 7 of the order dated 25.07.2018, which are extracted below for a better appreciation of the controversy on the conduct of the contemnors: 5. Before legality of the orders by which the petitioners have been terminated from service is examined, it would be necessary to record few facts. Pursuant to the advertisements inviting applications for appointment on the post of Inter-trained Assistant Teachers and Inter-trained Urdu Teachers, the petitioners submitted their applications for appointment under non-Para Teacher category. They all at that time were working as Para Teachers in different schools. These petitioners have been appointed on different dates and it is stated that on verification of the records when it was found that being Para Teachers they were not eligible for appointment under 50% seats reserved for the applicants under the non-Para Teacher category, they were terminated from service. It appears that a decision was taken to reinstate some of the petitioners, particularly petitioners in W.P.(S) No.5158 of 2017, in service and initiate a departmental proceeding against them on the allegation that they have been wrongly appointed under non-Para Teacher category. The order impugned by the petitioners in W.P.(S) No.5158 of 2017, however, reveals that subsequently departmental proceeding against them was dispensed with and on the basis of order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No.6031 of 2015 and W.P.(S) No.173 of 2016 they have again been terminated from service. 6. The learned State counsel has contended that once 50% of the total advertised seats were reserved for Para Teacher category, the applicants who at the time of submission of application were working as Para Teachers were not eligible to apply and get appointed under non-Para Teacher category. 7. This precisely was the argument advanced on behalf of the respondents in L.P.A. No. 186 of 2017 and L.P.A.No.199 of 2017. However, this argument did not find favour with the Hon'ble Division Bench and by an order dated 11.05.2018 the Letters Patent Appeals have been allowed. The Hon'ble Division Bench has held that under the rules or in the advertisement there is no stipulation under which an applicant working as Para Teacher is not eligible to seek appointment under the general category. Even otherwise also such a stipulation would have been contrary to the constitutional mandate under Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. An applicant who is otherwise eligible, may be he is a reserved category candidate, cannot be denied appointment under general category vacancy. ;