NARAYAN CHANDRA PUHAN Vs. BHASKAR CHANDRA BEHERA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Some cases have a message and it becomes necessary at times even to see beyond a case to maintain the purity in life and to take case to the extent possible and permissible in law of tailing moral values of the society. When a case is brought to the Court, no matter what is the status of the Court, a ligant is expected to tell the truth. It is for this reason that affidavits are required to be filed in those Courts where a matter is not decided on oral evidence which is led on oath. When a parson is administered oath, he is required to state, 'I shall speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth'. When Courts decide cases on affidavits, the deponent has to solemnly affirm and state the truth as ha knows it and sees it. If to serve personal gain or end or purpose, wrong statements are made : Court would be justified in taking a serious view of the same.

(2.) HERE is a case where the petitioner approached this Court first in OJC No. 1835 of 1978 with the grievance that though he had joined Mukundadev Madhya Vidyapitha as peon on 24 -7 -1974, he had been prohibited from discharging his duties with effect from 5 -7 -1978. This Court by its judgment rendered on 11 -12 -1986 stated that as there was no valid order of termination, the petitioner is deemed to be continuing as a peon of the school. It concluded that the petitioner's service h3d not been terminated. However, the prayer for arrear salary was not granted in the circumstances of the case. May it be stated here itself that the managing committee of the school was arrayed as opposite party No. 5 in that case, as to which the Bench disposing of that OJC stated in paragraph 3 that in spite of valid service of notice on this opposite party, no appearance had been made.

(3.) IN the present proceeding, the petitioner alleges that despite the aforesaid order, his dues have not been paid because of which contempt of this Court has been committed The are two opposite parties in the present proceeding. They are : (1) Bhaskar Chandra Behera, District Inspector of Schools, Bhadrak : and (2) Karunakar Khatua, Secretary, Mukundadev Madhyamik Vidyapitha. Though these persons were made opposite parties, notice was issued on opp. party No. 2 alone and his averment in paragraph' 3 of the show -cause is that in OJC No. 1835/78, the Secretary of the school was not a party. The second relevant everment is that the petitioner had never joined the school.