SHEO BALAK SINGH Vs. HARCHARANJIT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An appropriate penal action under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (for short hereinafter also referred to as the Act) read with Rule 3 of the Contempt of Court (Gauhati High Court) Rules, 1977 (for short hereafter referred to as the Rules) and Article 215 of the Constitution of India has been solicited in the instant petition alleging deliberate and wilful violation of the judgment and order dated 13.02.2007 passed by this Court in WP(C) Nos. 4989/2006 and 4994/2006.

(2.) I have heard Mr. D.K. Misra, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. K. Goswami, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. A. K. Goswami, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. N. Deka, Advocate for the respondent No. 2, Mr. N. Deka, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 and Mr. P. N. Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3. Ms. R. Bora, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4 is also heard.

(3.) The facts in brief constituting the preface of the imputations made, need to recorded at the outset. The petitioner is a Superintending Engineer (Civil) (for short hereafter referred to as SE) serving in the General Reserve Engineering Force (for short hereafter also referred to as the GREF), under the Boarder Roads Development Board (hereafter for short referred to as the Board/BRDB) and is presently posted in HQ CE(P), Sampark, Jammu. He instituted WP(C) No. 4989/2006 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before this Court impugning, inter alia, a letter dated 12.05.2006 issued by the Brigadier DDG (Personnel) for Director General Border Roads. Prior thereto, the Under Secretary to the Government of India, BRDB has issued an order dated 03.01.2005 with the approval of the BRDB, whereby, the Superintending Engineers in the Functional Scale of pay of Rs. 14,300-18,300/-, were declared to be equivalent to the Colonels of the Army. A letter dated 06.01.2005 followed in the same lines and consequentially different posts at Project HQ were redesignated. It was, further provided therein that the interse seniority of SE(FS) and the Colonels would be with reference to the dates of assumption of the Functional Scale vis-a-vis that of local/acting rank by the Colonel respectively. Thereafter, the Under Secretary, Government of India, BRDB issued another letter dated 10.06.2005, inter alia, stating that the SE's in the Functional Scale would also be equivalent to the Colonels of Army for the purpose of the Army Act. Thereafter, by the notification published in the Gazette on 07.09.2005 equivalence between SE(FS) and Colonel of the Army for the purpose of Army Act, was proclaimed. The Director General. BRDB, by the impugned letter dated 12.05.2006 superseded his earlier letter dated 06.01.2005 and restored the status quo ante in the matter of equation of Superintending Engineers (FS) with the Colonel of the Army including the nomenclature of appointments as it existed prior to the letter dated 03.01.2005 issued by the Under Secretary, Government of India, BRDB. Contending inter alia, that the Director General, BRDB lacked authority in the matter prescribing the service conditions of the petitioner, his appointing as well as cadre controlling authority being the Board and that the decision assailed, was arbitrary and discriminatory being violative of Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenged the letter dated 12.05.2006 in WP(C) No. 4989/2006 seeking annulment thereof. During the pendency of this writ petition, the petitioner initiated WP(C) No. 4994/2006 praying, inter alia, for an appropriate writ directing the respondents therein to declare the equivalence of SE(FS) and a regular Colonel of Army by acting on the criteria as referred to therein.