(1.) Heard the complainant/party-in-person at length.
(2.) The grievance of the complainant is that the accused has committed willful breach of the order dtd. 27/10/2022 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.11266/2022.
(3.) A perusal of the order dtd. 27/10/2022 shows that the complainant had initially approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal') for re-fixation of his seniority. The Tribunal, after hearing the parties, allowed the application in O.A.No.170/00349/2018. Aggrieved by the same, the complainant preferred a review petition. The review petition was also rejected. Being aggrieved by the order passed in review petition on 13/11/2019, W.P.No.3438/2020 was filed. Vide order dtd. 6/12/2021, the said writ petition was disposed of with liberty to the complainant to file his objections and by issuing directions to the accused. In pursuant to the above, a speaking order dtd. 25/2/2022 was passed by the accused. The said speaking order was challenged before this Court in W.P.No.11266/2022, on the ground that the order passed by the accused is not a speaking order. Vide order dtd. 27/10/2022, the Division Bench, partly allowed the writ petition, set aside the speaking order dtd. 25/2/2022 passed by the accused and remitted the matter back to the accused with a direction to consider the case of the complainant in the light of the Doordarshan Programme (Technical-Camera) Group 'A' and Group 'B' Recruitment Rules, 1987 and thereafter, pass a speaking order. The Division Bench also granted an opportunity of hearing to the complainant by fixing a particular date and the accused was directed to pass an order on or before 31/12/2022. The complainant himself has placed on record the order dtd. 16/12/2022 passed by the accused. The accused, ultimately arrived at a conclusion that the request of the complainant to modify the seniority list dtd. 9/10/1990 is not justified and therefore, cannot be acceded to. The said order was also communicated to the complainant.