YADVENDRA SINGH Vs. N K JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred against the order dated 06. 04. 2009, whereby S. B. Civil Contempt petition No. 111/2009, filed by the appellant/ petitioner, has been dismissed by the learned Single judge by recording the following order:-This contempt petition is arising out of the orders of this court for grant of opportunity to the respondents for filing reply. But no reply has been filed, therefore, as per submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, there is disobedience of the process of the order of this court. Learned counsel has cited the judgment of hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2006 (2) Apex Court Judgments 472 (SC)-Rama Narang Vs. Ramesh Narang and anr. I have gone through the aforesaid submission. As regards the non-filing of the reply, the law is well settled that same would not amount to any disobedience and the court is free to draw the adverse inference. The aforesaid judgment is relating to the undertaking, therefore, same would not apply to this particular case.

(2.) ACCORDINGLY, I find no substance in the contempt petition. The same is, therefore, dismissed. The appellant filed a writ petition before the Court seeking regularisation of his services. The process of service started by issuance of notice on 27. 05. 2008 by the Court. The respondent-University of Rajasthan, Jaipur, appeared on 12. 09. 2008 and sought time to file reply on or before 16. 10. 2008. Reply was not filed and opportunity was sought to file reply on or before next date i. e. 12. 11. 2008. On this date also, reply was not filed and the Court granted last opportunity fixing the date for filing reply on or before 28. 11. 2008. The respondents filed reply. The respondents terminated the services of the appellant vide order dated 28. 11. 2008, but this fact was not mentioned in the reply.

(3.) LEARNED counsel has submitted that since the process of the Court was going on, therefore, they have over reached the process of the Court and have committed the contempt of Court. In support of his plea, he has relied upon Section 2 (b) of the contempt of Courts Act, 1971, which reads as under:-2 (b ). civil contempt means wilful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a court or wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court. His submission is that other process of a court includes process of service of the respondents and, if reply is not filed as directed by the Court, it amounts to contempt of the Court.