RAVI KANT RAI Vs. SADA NAND PANDEY ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CONTEMPT of Court-Non-payment of salary-When High Court quashed simply the termination order- Remedies lies in favour before proper forum- No deliberate intentional flouting of order by High Court. Since the termination order was quashed, the petitioner would be deemed, by implication of law, to be in service although the petitioner could not discharge his duties due to the order of termination. He was not allowed to do his duties. By legal implication it becomes the duty for the respondent to pay the salary to the petitioner for the period that is from the date of the termination till the joining of the petitioner pursuant to the reinstatement order. These are legal implications if the respondent failed to appreciate the same, the remedies lies in different forum for the petitioner, but it cannot be held that he was intentionally flouting the order of the Hon'ble Court as the order was passed only for quashing the termina tion order the respondent in pursuant to the Hon'ble Courts order reinstated the petitioner. [para 3] .