K KRISHNA MOHAN RAO Vs. SUNIL ARORA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This contempt case is filed by the petitioners in Writ Petition No.6760 of 2001 and the respondents in Writ Appeal No.1433 of 2001.

(2.) During the years 1969 to 1971 the petitioners were appointed as Office Assistants and posted to work in the Support Sections of the Engineering Department of Indian Airlines. As per the second report of the Organisation and the Systems Group (OSG) dated 30-1-1975 the cadres of Technical Assistants, Senior Technical Assistants and Assistant Technical Officers were introduced. On 3-2-1976 the Director of Engineering accepted the said OSG recommendations by prescribing qualifications for the persons eligible to be appointed for those posts. The writ petitioners were appointed as Technical Assistants in the Support Sections of the Engineering Department after passing the required qualifying test, in pursuance of a notification dated 2-4-1976 issued by the then Chief Engineering Manager by prescribing the qualifications, experience and job requirements for the said posts. As per the said notification, the minimum educational qualification was prescribed as SSC/SSLC/Metriculation and four (04) years of satisfactory service in Indian Airlines out of which two years in Support Sections.After subjecting the writ petitioners to written and oral tests the management appointed them as Technical Assistants. Since the petitioners were not treated as technical cadre employees by extending the attendant benefits, the petitioners filed W.P.No.8090 of 1992 praying to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the management to declare them as Technical Assistants in the technical cadre and also to direct the respondents therein to treat them as Technical Assistants in technical cadre with all attendant service benefits, including time-bound promotions extended to technical cadre employees. This High Court through its judgment dated 16-11-1999 disposed of the writ petition holding that the petitioners are entitled to be treated as Technical Assistants as they were appointed to those posts on 16-5-1978 itself and the respondents shall have to consider their case for time-bound promotions also.

(3.) During the pendency of the said writ petition, the management issued proceedings on 28-4-1995 promoting the writ petitioners as Senior Technical Assistants benefiting all the petitioners with one increment and it was approved and confirmed by the competent authority on 29-11-1995. Subsequently the petitioners filed C.C.No.697 of 2000 complaining that the management committed a Contempt of Court by failing to implement the judgment of this High Court dated 16-11-1999 in W.P.No.8090 of 1992 in true letter and spirit. The contempt case was disposed of by this Court on 19-6-2000 by observing as follows: ... Suffice it to notice that this Court has not issued any directions, directing the respondents to promote any particular petitioner into any particular identified post. The respondents were directed to consider the case of the petitioners for at least one time promotion. The process appears to have been initiated by the respondents. In the circumstances, it is not possible for this Court to further probe into the matter and to find as to any of the directions of this Court have been violated. If the decision making process is vitiated adversely effecting the interest of any of the petitioners, it shall be open to them to avail the remedy that may be available to them in law. Suffice it to hold that the respondents have not committed any deliberate act or violation of the orders passed by this Court. I do not find any merit in this contempt case and the same shall accordingly stand dismissed. No costs.