BANSHIDHAR SAROJ Vs. PARTHA SARATHI SEN SHARMA C

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petitioner has been employed under the Government of U. P. as Block Development Officer at Phoolpur. By an office order from the office of Joint Development Commissioner. Allahabad, dated 13.5.98 the petitioner and others were transferred to different places. For the petitioner, there was a direction for his transfer from Phoolpur to Kaushambi. The transfer orders were to take effect immediately and the incumbents including the petitioner were directed to make over charge by 15.5.98 and to join at the new places of posting. By an order dated 20.5.98 under the signature of the present respondent, Partha Sarathi Sen Sharma, the present petitioner was directed to make over charge to the Block Development Officer, Pratappur. The transfer order, however, was cancelled so far as this petitioner was concerned under the orders of the Commissioner, Allahabad Division dated 30.5.98 whereby the original order dated 13.5.98 was modified and the transfer of Banshidhar Saroj from Phoolpur to Kaushambi was withdrawn and Jaiprakash Pandey. Block Development Officer. Gaura, was transferred to Kaushambi instead of Pratappur. There was, however, another letter issued on 1.6.98 by the Chief Development Officer, Allahabad, whereby one Ram Ashrey was directed to report to Phoolpur. This letter although bears a date 1.6.98 under the signature of the Chief Development Officer, indicates the date 30.5.98 against the letter No. 167 given on it. On 1.6.98 itself, Banshidhar Saroj wrote to the Chief Development Officer with reference to his letter dated 20.5.98 informing him that the Commissioner, Allahabad Division, had cancelled the transfer order in respect of him. On 15.6.98 Banshidhar Saroj filed Writ Petition No. 20392 of 1998 stating the facts as mentioned above and made a prayer for a writ of mandamus upon the Chief Development Officer, Allahabad (Partha Sarathi Sen Sharma) so that the order for posting Ram Asrey as Block Development Officer, Phoolpur, be cancelled and the order of the Commissioner cancelling the transfer of Banshidhar Saroj be duly honoured and he may be allowed to continue as Block Development Officer, Phoolpur. Through supplementary affidavit papers were brought on record to show how the petitioner had worked at Phoolpur as Block Development Officer even after the impugned order.

(2.) This writ petition was placed before an Hon'ble Single Judge of this High Court on 17.6.98 and the matter was directed to be put up on 22.6.98 and there was a direction that the impugned order dated 30.5.98 shall not be given effect to. The interim order was extended from time to time. In the instant, contempt petition dated 20.7.98 it was alleged that the interim orders of this High Court dated 17.6.98. 22.6.98 and 24.6.98 were in the knowledge of the respondent (Partha Sarathi Sen Sharma). It was further asserted that the original transfer order having been cancelled by the Commissioner on 30.5.98, the petitioner continued to work as Block Development Officer at Phoolpur and he was never relieved therefrom, nor anybody else was given the charge of that office. It was asserted that the respondent, in utter disobedience of the orders of this High Court, had sent a wireless message on 24.6.98 to the block office at Phoolpur indicating therein that any employee placing official papers/records before the petitioner would be punished. This wireless message was annexed as Annexure-14 to the contempt petition. On the basis thereof a prayer was made for punishing the contemner for contempt of court.

(3.) The respondent contemner was noticed and a counter-affidavit was filed on his behalf. It was asserted that on 8.6.98 charge was made over and only thereupon Ram Asrey started acting as a Block Development Officer at Phoolpur. It was asserted further that in the original transfer order dated 13.5.98, there was a clear direction that the transfer order should be honoured by 15.5.98. When it was not complied with, an order was issued by the present respondent on 20.5.98 for compliance of the transfer order but the petitioner did not abide by the order of the Commissioner and of the Chief Development Officer. He absented from duty from 26.5.98 to 30.5.98 and prayed for leave on medical ground. After this leave, he was to resume duty with a certificate of fitness from the Medical Officer but till the date of the reply. Sri Saroj had not sent any fitness certificate. The contemner annexed to his counter-affidavit copies of the charge certificate and of the leave application. It was asserted further that the Commissioner, Allahabad Division, by his order No. 487 dated 30.5.98 had cancelled the order of transfer of Sri Saroj to Kaushambi. By his following order communicated through letter No. 206 dated 1.6.98 issued from the office of the Joint Development Commissioner, the District Magistrate was directed to place the petitioner at any place except Phoolpur. This letter was said to have been produced before the Court on 24.6.98. The record of the writ petition indicates that this letter was annexed as Annexure-3 to the counter-affidavit of the respondent in the writ petition and it was indicated in the letter that Sri Banshidhar Saroj be posted by the District Magistrate in any Development Block other than Phoolpur in the district of Allahabad. Accordingly, the petitioner was kept attached to the district village development authority, but he never joined this post. The application allegedly given by Sri Saroj on 1.6.98, was never received in the office of the respondent contemner. A copy of the receipt register was annexed in proof of this assertion. As Sri Saroj was continuously absent from 26.5.98 even after expiry of the leave on 30.5.98, charge of Phoolpur was made over to Ram Asrey which was a routine action by the administration. The contemner denied that the order of the Commissioner dated 30.5.98 was defied. The contemner further stated in his affidavit that only on 24.6.98, an order for maintaining status quo was passed and by that date. Ram Asrey had already been in charge of the Development Block at Phoolpur. That position has not been disturbed after 24.6.98. As regards the papers relied upon by the petitioner to indicate that he had been working at Phoolpur even after the interim order of the Court. It was stated that unlawfully he had shown to have exercised certain powers and had kept in his possession certain papers of the block, only with a view to create circumstances in his favour. He had never joined after his medical leave and there was no question of inspecting any Kisan Sewa Centre. The contemner also denied to have issued any wireless message. It was asserted that there was no violation of any order of the Court and there could be no question of commission of contempt of court.