RAHEES AHMAD Vs. K. K. UPADHYAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though these contempt petitions are reported to be barred by Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act; but with the consent of the parties, who are represented through their counsels, the same are being taken up for hearing and decided finally in view of the fact that the issue raised in the present contempt petitions, has already been settled by this Court in an earlier judgment rendered by this Court, which is referred in the contempt petitions.

(2.) The facts, which are involved in the present contempt petitions, are that petitioners of the contempt petitions, contend that they were license holder and were having the registration, which was issued by the competent authority in order to engage them in the mining activities. In accordance with the decision of the District Mining Committee dated 20.11.2014 and 25.02.2015, the license holders, who were supposed to be engaged in the mining activities, can replaced their old vehicles with new ones. When the same was not being registered by the respondent the issue came forward for consideration before the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 760 of 2019 (Nitendra Singh Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others) which was decided by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide its judgment dated 12.04.2019. It is on the basis of the said judgment that the writ petitions preferred by the petitioners was decided, the details of which are given hereunder (i) in Contempt Petition No. 419 of 2020, petitioner preferred a Writ Petition (MS) No. 1447 of 2019, which was decided on 23.05.2019 (ii) in Contempt Petition No. 420 of 2020, the petitioner preferred a Writ Petition (MS) No. 1460 of 2019, which was decided on 24.05.2019 (iii) in Contempt Petition No. 421 of 2020, the petitioner preferred a Writ Petition (MS) No. 643 of 2020, which was decided on 13.03.2020 (iv) in Contempt Petition No. 422 of 2020, the petitioner preferred a Writ Petition (MS) No. 314 of 2020, which was decided on 11.02.2020 and (v) in Contempt Petition No. 423 of 2020, the petitioner preferred a Writ Petition (MS) No. 1538 of 2019, which was decided on 29.05.2019.

(3.) The petitioners of these contempt petitions have submitted that they had applied for the registration of their new vehicles, since they were not being registered and since writ petitions were disposed of in pursuance to the judgment rendered by the Courts earlier and coupled with the fact that a bunch of contempt petitions, some of them, which are referred in paragraph 18 of the Contempt Petition No. 419 of 2020 being Contempt Petition No. 656 of 2020 (Zameer Vs. P.S. Bora and another), which was decided on 28.02.2020 and a bunch of contempt petitions with the leading case Contempt Petition No. 85 of 2020 (Farman Vs. K.K. Upadhyay), which was decided on 29.09.2020, the issue raised in the present contempt petitions stands covered by the said judgment, as referred above.