AMIT KUMAR Vs. R RAJAGOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner complains of the deliberate and wilful violation of an order of December 13, 2013 by the alleged contemnor.

(2.) The order of December 13, 2013 was passed on a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging an order of March 22, 2013 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal. By the relevant order, the Tribunal had held that the petitioner had no legal right to examine any expert who had rendered an adverse opinion against the petitioner.

(3.) The matter pertains to the alleged impersonification of the petitioner at the time of a recruitment examination conducted by the railway authorities. In short, it is the charge or the suspicion of the railway authorities that some person other than the petitioner may have taken the examination on behalf of the petitioner and, thereby, rendered the petitioner's candidature to be annulled on such ground. A criminal complaint may have also been filed. The act of alleged impersonification may not be limited to the petitioner's case and may have been quite rampant.