BAJRANG LAL SHARMA Vs. SALLAUDEEN AHMED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE both the contempt petitions had been preferred for committing contempt of judgment dated 05.02.2010 passed by this Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8104/2008, therefore, they were heard together and are being disposed off by a common order.

(2.) D .B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 941/2010, Samta Andolan Vs. Shri Salauddin Ahmed and Another was preferred on 26.10.2010, contending therein that this Court vide judgment dated 05.02.2010 quashed Notifications dated 28.12.2002 and 25.04.2008 and declared the same ultra vires to the provisions of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Further, this Court has also quashed and set aside all the consequential orders or actions taken by the respondents, including seniority list of Super Time Scale as well as Selection Scale of the Rajasthan Administrative Service Officers, issued on the basis of above notifications. The State of Rajasthan had then preferred a Special Leave Petition(Civil) No. 7716/2010 before the Hon'ble Apex Court, wherein no interim order had been passed in favour of State and despite all these, the respondents are sitting tight over the matter and proceeding with promotions in different departments. The hearing before the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been concluded and order is reserved, but despite all these, the respondents are not restraining themselves from convening the Departmental Promotion Committee for various posts in different departments. The petitioner had given representation to the respondents for complying with the judgment passed by this Court, but instead of complying with the same, the respondents are continuously making promotions in different services and issuing seniority lists in various departments; for illustraton, promotions made in Co-operative Department, PWD Department, Finance Department, etc. in violation of the judgment passed by this Court. The copies of representations, seniority lists, promotion orders have been annexed with the contempt petition. It is further averred in the contempt petition that the petitioner has also served upon respondents a legal notice for contempt of Court on 12.10.2010. But despite all these efforts of the petitioner, the respondents are continuously defying and violating the judgment passed by this Court.

(3.) D .B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 359/2011 was filed on 08.03.2011, contending therein that this Court vide its judgment dated 05.02.2010 quashed Notifications dated 28.12.2002 and 25.04.2008, issued by State of Rajasthan. It was also contended that despite dismissal of SLP filed by State before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the respondents are not making compliance of judgment dated 05.02.2010 passed by this Court. The petitioners are suffering on account of inaction of the respondents, as rights of the petitioners are being curtailed for being considered for promotion into IAS, because the maximum age for consideration for appointment on the post of IAS is 54 years and the petitioners are approaching the maximum age. The respondents are, now, duty bound to restore the seniority of the petitioners, who have a right of seniority, which has accrued/vested in them by virtue of seniority list dated 26.06.2000. The respondents are deferring the compliance of the judgment on the ground of collection of quantifiable data required for enabling the State of Rajasthan to exercise power under Article 16(4A) of the constitution of India. It is also contended that in pursuance of judgment dated 05.02.2010, the State is not required to collect quantifiable data for making compliance of the judgment, because enabling power, under Article 16(4A) of the Constitution of India, is the discretionary power of the respective State Government. The State Government is neither under any obligation to give reservation in promotion along with consequential seniority, nor the reserved category employees have any vested constitutional right for the same. The State has issued a letter dated 14.02.2011 in so-called compliance of judgment dated 07.12.2010 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 6385/2010 and asked all the the departments to give information with regard to SC/ST employees from 01.04.1997 onwards, on year wise basis. The State has also directed all the concerned departments to give information in the proforma strictly, which was enclosed with the letter, on consolidated basis of the whole service and not separately with regard to different posts coming under that service. The letter dated 14.02.2011 is contemptuous because: (A) The State cannot collect data with retrospective date in pursuance of M. Nagaraj case and judgment dated 07.12.2010. (B) State has to collect data in each case i.e. each ladder of promotion in a service; otherwise the exercise would be a camouflage which will not show the conglomeration of SC/ST employees at higher echelons of the services.