AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per: Justice Sunil Thomas, Judicial Member
The Contempt Petition was earlier closed by order dated 11.03.2026 leaving it open to the applicant to revive the C.P to the stage where it stood closed as on 11.03.2026, if the entire amount liable to be paid has not been paid within the stipulated time.
Later contending that the order has not been fully complied with and the entire amount due to the applicant was not paid, application was filed to revive the C.P. Accordingly, the matter was taken up and objection dated 22.06.2026 was filed by the respondents reiterating that the order has been fully complied with.
The learned Counsel for the applicant contended that he had sought for stepping up with that of M. Aravindakshan and this Tribunal had allowed the relief. However, at the stage of implementation, the respondents have taken into consideration of case of P.Y. Reji, on a premise that he was the immediate junior of the applicant. The learned SPC invited our attention to our order dated 11.03.2026, wherein the very same contention now advanced by the learned Counsel for the applicant was considered and rejected. This Tribual had only directed stepping up to the pay of immediate junior of applicant. We have referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court in OP (CAT) No.114 of 2025 which which held that the applicant is senior to P.Y.Reji since the applicant was appointed in the lower post on 28.10.1986, while Reji was appointed only on 25.08.1987.
In the light of this specific finding based on which the same contention was answered by us, we find that the same contention cannot be entertained. C.P is accordingly closed as fully satisfied. No costs.