NARESH KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the parties.

(2.) PETITIONER has prayed for initiation of a contempt proceeding and for punishing the opposite parties, particularly opposite party no. 2 who is Director -cum -Special Secretary, Government of Bihar, Civil Aviation Department, Bihar Flying Institute, Civil Aviation Department, Patna for their wilfuldis -obedience and dis -regard of order of this court dated 15.3.2000 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 3705 of 1999. A copy of the aforesaid order of this Court dated 15.3.2000 has been annexed as Annexure.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has tried to persuade this Court to go into the merit of decision of the Departmental Promotion Committee to keep the result of their deliberations in a seal cover. For this purpose submissions were advanced to the effect that an administrative resolution of September, 2002 cannot be applied to the case of the petitioner which was required to be considered, as per order contained in Annexure -4, on the basis of facts existing on the relevant date and as per law. It was further submitted that as per settled law a charge in a criminal case or in a departmental proceeding is necessary before it can be held by the authority that criminal and departmental proceedings were pending against the petitioner on the date he became eligible for consideration on account of vacancy in the concerned posts. According to learned counsel for the petitioner since in the subsequent departmental proceeding charge sheet was served only in the year 2002 and the criminal proceeding was also of the year 2000 hence they could not have been taken into consideration for the purpose of resorting to sealed cover procedure even if actual meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee took place on a later date. In support of the aforesaid plea reliance has been placed upon a judgment of this court in the case of Shri Krishna Ram vs. State of Bihar, reported in 1998 (2) PLJR 440, particularly upon paragraph -16 of the judgment. It was further submitted on the basis of judgment of the Apex Court in the case of R.M. Ramaul vs. State of Himachal Pradesh (AIR 1991 S.C. 1171) and a Division Bench Judgment of this court in the case of Ram Vilas Mishra vs. State of Bihar, reported in 1993 (1) PLJR 437, that in the interest of justice this court can pass appropriate order even in exercise of jurisdiction under Contempt of Court 'sAct if it is found that there had been a wilful violation of court 's order.