NAURANG RAM Vs. B R MEENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. This Court has directed in D.B.Civil Special Appeal No. 363/2003 while allowing the appeal on 9.3.2004 that the petitioners are entitled to be declared as Semi-Permanent with effect from the date they completed two years of continuous service on work charged establishment and the consequences of acquisition of Semi-Permanent under the Rules shall follow.

(2.) Since the aforesaid directions were not given effect to, the petitioners preferred D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 160/2004. During the pendency of the aforesaid contempt petition after issuance of notice, the respondents issued order dated 15.1.2005 refixing the date with effect from which each of the petitioner was conferred with Semi-Permanent status and directing that until 31.3.2004 i.e. date of the previous order they shall be entitled to notional benefit of remunerations only, which was stated to be as per their consent given in the application filed earlier.

(3.) Be that as it may, while aforesaid order was brought to the notice of the Court, by order dated 2.6.2005 notices of the aforesaid contempt petition were discharged without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the petitioners with respect to the effective compliance of the order. Apparently, the Court has left the petitioners free to pursue their remedy other than contempt petition if they were not satisfied with the order dated 15.1.2005.