PRAMOD KUMAR PANDEY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard Sri P.N. Saxena, assisted by Sri Amit Saxena for the appellant. Sri P.K. Mishra, appears for respondent Nos. 2 to 4 - State Election Commission. The standing counsel appears for respondent No. 1.

(2.) IN this intra-court appeal, the petitioner-appellant is aggrieved by the judgment of learned Single Judge dated 27.8.2004 in writ petition No. 18730 of 2003, in which a direction was issued that the benefit of giving preference allowed in the judgment of Supreme Court in U.P. State Road Transport Corporation v. U.P.P.N.S.B. Sangh, AIR 1995 SC 1115, (in that all other things being equal the petitioner will be given preference in direct recruitment), be allowed, if the petitioner applies for any post of clerk to fall vacant for future under the State Election Commission. The Court has further directed to allow other benefits, which are available to him under para 12 of the judgment of the Supreme Court.

(3.) THE petitioner-appellant thereafter filed a contempt application No. 2409 of 2001 for compliance of the order of the Division Bench in Special Appeal No. 784 of 2000. An objection was taken that the petitioner did not apply for appointment in response to the advertisement issued on 15.12.2000, for filling up of 49 posts of Clerks and Typists under direct recruitment. Learned Judge hearing the contempt application on 12.9.2002 found that there was no such direction given by the Court to the petitioner to apply, and that the consideration of his appointment was not subject to making an application. Learned Judge hearing the contempt matter summoned the opposite parties to appear before the Court on 29.10.2002 for framing of charges. THE authorities appeared before the Court. On the explanation given by them, the contempt application was dismissed on 6.1.2003 holding that there was no wilful disobedience of the order of the Division Bench dated 14.12.2000.