ADITYA SONOWAL Vs. V J SOOD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act read with Art. 215 of the Constitution of India. This application of Contempt has been filed by 29 persons against one Shri V.J. Sud, the Regional Director, Oil and Natural Gas Commission, Eastern Region. It is submitted that Respondent No. 1 in the mean time has retired. The next alleged contemner is Shri C.B.P. Sainy, the General Manager, Oil and Natural Gas Commission, Dhansiri Valley Project, Bishnu Bhawan, Jorhat. The third alleged Contemner is Shri K.K. Sarma, the Deputy General Manager, Oil and Natural Gas Commission, Dhansiri Valley Project, Bishnu Bhavan, Jorhat.

(2.) The brief facts are as follows :- That there was a Reference being No. 1(C) of 1989 before the Industrial Tribunal, Guwahati, Assam by one union represented by the Secretary, D.V.P. Jorhat and the petitioners are members of that Union. The Industrial Tribunal, inter alia, arrived at the following finding and gave an award as follows :-

(3.) The award was given on 12th day of March, 1991. As against that award a Civil Rule was filed by the Management being Civil Rule No. 4375 of 1991. The Union also filed another Civil Rule being Civil Rule No. 1907 of 1988. That was earlier to the award and this Court kept that Civil Rule pending and as the award was given in favour of the Union, that Civil Rule was disposed of and Civil Rule No. 4375 of 1991 was dismissed. That Judgment was passed on 5-9-1993. As against that one S.L.P. was filed before the Apex Court and that was dismissed on 25-2-1994 and the award assured finality for all purposes. Earlier to this another Contempt petition being C.O.P. (C) No. 397 of 1994 was filed before this Court by the Union and that Contempt petition came up for hearing on 15-7-1996 and this Court accepted the explanation given by the Management and accordingly it was held that no case for disobedience and deliberate violation of the order of this Court is made out and that was closed. This Contempt petition has been filed by this 29 persons on 9-5-1995, before disposal of the other contempt petition, it would have been proper, if both the Contempt petitions would have been taken together. But that was not done. Hence, this Contempt petition has come up for hearing after disposal of the other contempt petition.