KAMLA DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pursuant to order dated 13.6.2001. Regional Director Animal Husbandry Department, Ranchi appeared in person and filed his show-cause.

(2.) Petitioners were appointed on compassionate ground in 1993 by the order of the Regional Director, Animal Husbandry Department. Ranchi namely the present contemnor/ opposite-party. However, after then worked for about 6 years their services were terminated by virtue of office order by the concerned respondent-opposite-party. Petitioner moved this Court by filing CWJC No. 1647/99R, which was allowed and the order of termination was set aside. Inspite of the order passed by this Court, the contemnor/opposite-party did not allow the petitioners to join their duties which resulted in filing of this contempt petition. In the show-cause dated 12.3.2001 filed by the opposite-parry, he explained that the joining reports of the petitioners were forwarded to the Director, Animal Husbandry Department, Bihar Patna for necessary action. In other words although the letter of termination was issued by the present opposite-party but and such order does not speak about any direction of the Director for terminating the services of the petitioners. This Court took serious view of the matter and passed the order dated 13.6.2001 directing the opposite-party/Regional Director, to appear in person and to explain why on appropriate order should not be passed against him for committing contempt of this Court, for the reason that when the order of termination was issued by him, it was he who should accept the joining of the petitioners. Pursuant to the aforesaid order a supplementary show cause has been filed stating inter alia that due to inadvertance he understood that the order or termination was passed by him on the order of the Director and therefore he forwarded the representation of petitioners to the higher authorities. Opposite party further tendered his unqualified apology and stated he has accepted the joining of the petitioners w.e.f. the date of her aforesaid representation dated 9.5.2000 and 11.5.2000.

(3.) It appears that the Regional Director. Animal Husbandry Department has flouted the order of this Court. The show-cause is however, accepted taking serious exception to the conduct of the officer. Needless to say that since the order or termination itself was set aside by this Court, petitioners should be entitled to all monetary benefits from the date of termination of their services till the date of their joining.