Mumukshu Kumar Choudhary vs Bijendra Kumar

Heard Mr. Pushkar Narain Shahi, learned senior counsel along with Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Md. Shahid Siddiqui, learned AC to AAG 5 for the State.

The appellant has moved the Court being aggrieved by judgment and order dated 03.08.2022 passed in MJC No. 650 of 2022 by the learned single Judge.

By the said order, the appellant has been directed to be proceed against departmentally. On 03.11.2022, the Court had passed detailed order and had granted leave to the appellant to maintain the appeal and had also granted interim stay against such order.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that besides him not being made a party, no contempt had been committed by him as has been noticed by the Court in its order dated 03.11.2022. Further, it was submitted that because the appellant at the relevant time, when the learned single Judge was hearing the case, had taken over charge of another post, he was neither heard nor present when the Court was considering the matter. Thus, it was submitted that the appellant did not have opportunity to explain his conduct. However, it was submitted that the appellant has filed a supplementary affidavit in which unconditional apology has been tendered for any inadvertent mistake in making the observation to the effect that if the certificate debtors do not deposit the entire certificate amount by 25.02.2021, bailable warrant would be issued against them while passing the order dated 25.01.2021 in Certificate Case No. 01/2017-2018.

Having considered the issue, the Court finds that the appellant is required to be given benefit of doubt and no deliberate and willful disobedience can be said to be made out against the conduct of the appellant.

However, the Court would observe that the appellant is required to be careful and cautious and also mindful of any order/observation made by the Court towards which he is not only required to be sensitive but also to fully comply the same. Learned counsel for the appellant assured that in future the appellant would not commit such error.

Learned counsel for the State also does not oppose the prayer of the appellant.

Having considered the submissions of learned counsels for the parties and taking into consideration the factual aspect, the appeal is allowed. The judgment and order of the learned single Judge dated 03.08.2022 passed in MJC No. 650 of 2022 to the extent by which departmental proceeding has been directed to be initiated against the appellant stands set aside. If during the interregnum period the authorities have started any departmental proceeding, the same shall also stand closed.