Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RAM SABD SINGH versus SRI RAJA RAM UPADHYAY & ANOTHER

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ram Sabd Singh v. Sri Raja Ram Upadhyay & Another - CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2556 of 2005 [2007] RD-AH 17158 (30 October 2007)

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

Hon. Dilip Gupta, J.

The petitioner alleges violation of the interim order dated 18th January, 2005. This Court by the said order while granting time to the parties to exchange the affidavits directed the District Judge, Azamgarh to engage the Seasonal Collection Amins strictly in accordance with the seniority in the seniority list prepared and finalized by him subject to their suitability.

The petitioner has stated that the petitioner has been shown at Serial No. 143 but two candidates namely Shiv Poojan Yadav and Ram Narain Yadav who are lower then the petitioner in the seniority list have been engaged as Seasonal Collection Amins and, therefore, the order passed by this Court has been wilfully disobeyed. In the counter affidavit filed by the opposite parties it has been stated that though these two candidates are at Serial No. 178 and 224 respectively but they have been engaged as the respondent had to comply with the provisions of U.P. Act No. 104 of 1994 which provides for reservation and these two candidates belonged to the OBC Category. It has further been stated that the common seniority list has been prepared for the entire district Azamgarh but the engagement of the Seasonal Collection Amins is Tehsil wise and in Tehsil Lalganj there was no candidate of OBC category except these two persons. It has also been stated that these two persons have also filed writ petition in this Court and obtained orders.

In this view of the matter, it cannot be said that there is any wilfull disobedience of the order passed by this Court. It is, however, open to the petitioner to pursue his remedy before the Writ Court and file an appropriate application.

The Contempt Petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

Date: 30.10.2007

NSC-2556


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.