AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Alok Mathur, J
Heard Sri Anurag Tripathi, learned counsel for applicant.
Learned counsel for applicant has urged that the order of the writ court dated 02.03.2022 passed in Writ A No. - 748 of 2022 has not been complied with by the respondents, hence the present contempt petition has been filed. It has been stated that this Court had quashed the order of attachment of the applicant dated 07.01.2022 and left it open to the respondents to initiate appropriate proceedings against the petitioner and pass further orders.
It is noticed that by means of order dated 11.03.2022, the District Development Officer, Bahraich has set aside the order dated 07.01.2022 which has been quashed by this Court and further by means of order dated 14.03.2022, the applicant was reinstated on the post he was holding prior to passing of the order dated 07.01.2022.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for applicant that despite being reinstated, the work of the petitioner has been given to Sri Varurendra Kumar Singh which order according to him was passed on 18.01.2022. He submits that it is the order dated 18.01.2022 which is continuing contrary to the direction of this Court.
I have heard learned counsel for applicant that perused the record. It is noticed that the order dated by order dated 02.03.2022 while allowing the writ petition, the impugned order dated 07.01.2022 was set aside and in pursuance of the same the applicant was reinstated in service and even the District Development Officer has set aside the order dated 07.01.2022.
Considering that the applicant was reinstated on the post he was holding prior to passing of the impugned order dated 07.01.2022 in compliance of the order of the writ court. It is noticed that the order of the writ court has been fully complied with by the respondent and it cannot be said that the respondent now runs in contempt of the order passed by the writ Court once the applicant has been reinstated, the direction of this Court stands fully complied with. The appointing authority/Superior Authority has full discretion with regard to work to be taken by his employee or even transferring in public interest wherever required.
Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court is of the considered view that the order dated 02.03.2022 has been fully complied with by the respondents and it cannot be said date respondent has violated any part of the order of the writ court.
Accordingly, the contempt petition is bereft of merits and is dismissed.
Notices issued are discharged.