Dev Raj Pathania vs Fouja Singh

Vivek Singh Thakur, J

Learned Deputy Advocate General submits that the order, for violation whereof, present Contempt Petition has been filed, stands complied with by the concerned authorities, i.e. Deputy Director, Elementary Education, Chamba and there was a direction to consider the case in terms of judgments referred to in the order passed by the erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal and right of the petitioner was to be determined on verification that the petitioner is similarly situated to the petitioners in those petitions. After consideration of the facts, Deputy Director, Elementary Education, Chamba has rejected the claim of the petitioner.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that in the identical case, in compliance of some judgment passed on 27.11.2017 in O.A. No. 5917 of 2017 titled Suresh Kumar vs. State of H.P., Deputy Director, Elementary Education, Mandi has allowed the identical claim of another person, whereas, in the present case, claim of the petitioner has been rejected. He further submits that the Department is taking two contrary stands with respect to identically situated person.

Rightly or wrongly, the representation of the petitioner stands decided by the Deputy Director, Elementary Education, Chamba vide order dated 21.12.2018 and benefits to identical person as claimed by the petitioner have been given by Deputy Director, Elementary Education, Mandi but not by the same Officer who has rejected the claim of the petitioner.

In case petitioner is similarly situated, he would also definitely be entitled for the same benefit, however, for adjudicating the said issues, this Contempt Petition is not appropriate course and, therefore, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file comprehensive petition for redressal of his grievances, if advised so.

The petition is closed and disposed of in the aforesaid terms.