NASIRUDDIN ANSARI Vs. STATE OF SIKKIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question that falls for consideration before this Court in the present Writ Petition is short. However, the process of dispensation of justice to the satisfaction of the petitioner has taken a remarkably long time. The petitioner suffered an accident in the year 1993 while working in the premises of respondent nos. 2 and 3. His left arm had to be amputated and he was permanently disabled. On 26.03.2008 the Court of the Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities rejected the complaint filed by the petitioner as he was found not to have been in the direct employment of respondent nos. 2 and 3. However, keeping in view the fact that the petitioner had acquired disability while in employment of the contractor, who was working for the respondent nos. 2 and 3, the respondent nos.2 and 3 were advised to consider the petitioner and give him preference while making recruitment against "reserved vacancies" in future. In the second round of litigation, which was before this Court, in Writ Petition (C) No.15 of 2008, the petitioner lost and his writ petition was dismissed. However, in view of the permanent disability of the petitioner and considering his poor economic condition, the respondent nos. 2 and 3 were asked to consider the petitioner for appointment against any "reserved vacancies." When the petitioner was not so considered by the respondent nos. 2 and 3, the third round of litigation started. In Writ Petition (C) No. 09 of 2014 preferred by the petitioner a judgment dated 02.03.2015 (for short 'the judgment') was passed by this Court. The following directions in paragraph 6 of the judgment are relevant:

(2.) It is an admitted fact that the judgment of this Court was not assailed by the respondent nos.2 and 3. The judgment therefore has attained finality. This was in the year 2015.

(3.) In the year 2018 the petitioner is back before this Court. The petitioner complains about non-adherence of the judgment of this Court by the respondent nos. 2 and 3.