The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CONTC No.551 of 2021 Ganesh Chandra Rout …. Petitioner Mr.Satyajit Samal , Advocate -versus- Satyabrata Sahu, Commissioner-cum-Secretary, School & mass Education Department, Odisha & Others …. Opp. Parties CORAM:
Decision
ORDER 16.05.2023 Hybrid Mode 1. The compliance affidavit dated 31.05.2021 filed by the District Education Officer, Kendrapara is on record, of which paragraphs-3, 5, 6 and 8 reads as follows: Order No. 05. “3. That, the petitioner has initiated CONTC No.1499 of 2018 for non-compliance of the order dated 12.11.2015 passed by this Hon’ble Court in W.P.(C) No.6112 of 2004. It is humbly and respectfully submitted by O.P.No.3 that pursuant to the order dtd.12.11.2015 passed by this Hon’ble Court in W.P.(C) No.6112 of 2004, the then District Education Officer, Kendrapara in due obedience of the order dtd.12.11.2015 passed in W.P.(C) No.6112 of 2004 directed his officials to calculate the arrear differential salary of the petitioner for the withheld period from December, 2003 to September, 2004 and also for the month of February 2005. Upon due calculation at the instance of the officials of the O.P. No.3 it was found that the petitioner is entitled to a sum of Rs.40,645/- which was withheld pursuant to the office order passed under Annexure-5 to the W.P.(C) No.6112 of 2004. Accordingly, the said amount of Rs.40,645/- was duly paid to the Page 1 of 4 // 2 // petitioner and the petitioner received the said amount of Rs.40.645/-. That, it is humbly submitted by O.P. No.3 5. that after filing of the said compliance affidavit the contempt application bearing CONTC No.1499 of 2018 was listed for hearing of the contempt application on 16.08.2019. The Hon’ble Court after perusing the averments made in the compliance affidavit as well as the said documents submitted compliance affidavit was pleaded to drop the contempt proceeding on 16.08.2019. For better appreciation of facts the order dtd.16.08.2019 passed in CONTC No.1499 of 2018 by this Hon’ble Court is quoted hereunder. thereto in it has “None appears for the petitioner at the learned time of call. Mr. B.Satpathy, Standing Counsel for School & Mass Education filed compliance affidavit. In that view of the matter, the contempt proceeding is hereby dropped.” That, Department 6. is humbly and respectfully submitted by O.P. No.3 that since the order dtd.12.11.2015 passed in W.P.(C) No.6112 of 2004 was complied with and compliance affidavit was filed showing due compliance of order of the Hon’ble Court and the Hon’ble Court was pleased to dispose of the contempt proceeding on 16.08.2019. Accordingly, the CONTC No.1499 of 2018 was dropped. The petitioner has initiated another contempt proceeding i.e. CONTC No.1769 of 2019 alleging non-compliance of the order dated in W.P.(C) No.6112 of 12.11.2019 passed 2004.The said contempt application was disposed of on 24.10.2019. In this connection, it is pertinent to mention here that since CONTC No.1769 of 2019 was disposed of at the stage of admission, there was no occasion on the part of the State Counsel to apprise the Hon’ble Court about compliance affidavit and on the basis of such compliance affidavit dropping the contempt proceeding bearing CONTC No.1499 of 2018 on 16.08.2019. However, the Hon’ble Page 2 of 4 // 3 // Court while disposing of CONTC No.1769 of 2019 on 24.10.2019 observed as follows: o the XXX “Perused non-compliance the record. The petitioner has filed this contempt petition for order dtd.12.11.2015 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.6112/2004 wherein no time limit has been fixed for compliance of the said order. Thereby, this Court directed the opposite parties to compliance with the order dated 12.11.2015, if not complied in the meantime, within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Accordingly, the contempt petition stands disposed of. 8. That, it is further humbly and respectfully submitted by O.P. No.3 that the cost of reiteration that the order dated 12.11.2015 passed in W.P.(C) No.6112 of 2004 has already been complied with and such compliance has been reported to this Hon’ble Court by way of filing of a compliance affidavit and accordingly the CONTC No.1499 of 2018 was dropped by order dtd.16.08.2019 passed by this Hon’ble Court. As such, the subsequent contempt proceeding alleging non-compliance of order dtd.12.11.2015 passed in W.P.(C) No.6112 of 2004 is not sustainable in the eye of law. It is further humbly submitted that since the order dtd.12.11.2015 has already been complied with by making necessary payment of arrear differential salary to the petitioner, for which this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleaded to issue necessary direction to the Registry of this Hon’ble Court not to take any action against the opposite parties.” 2. The objection filed by the petitioner dated 07.05.2023 to the compliance affidavit filed by the District Education Officer, Kendrapara is on record. However, learned counsel for the petitioner takes, a rather strange stand, that the objection has been filed without he receiving a copy of the compliance affidavit. Page 3 of 4 // 4 // Such stand on the face of, is incorrect and has to be rejected. Further, the petitioner by sworn affidavit dated 07.05.2023, wherein he has also been identified by Mr. Satyajit Samal, learned counsel, at paragraph-1 has stated “That, I am the petitioner in this case and gone through the contents of the compliance affidavit filed by the Opp. Party no.3 and understood the same”. Though the learned counsel has himself singed the objection/affidavit dated 07.05.2023 as the Advocate, giving a certificate as well as identifying the petitioner, i.e. at two places and also the Notary has indicated the name of Mr. S. Samal as the counsel, still the learned counsel submits that he has not received copy of the objection 3. In view of such apparent incorrect stand taken by the petitioner, the contempt petition disserves to be dismissed with costs. 4. This Court is unable to comprehend the reasons of such unusual stand taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner which amounts to abuse of process of law. However, taking a lenient view, the matter is dealt with on its merit. On going through the contents of the compliance affidavit, this Court is satisfied that the order dated 12.11.2015 passed in W.P.(C) No.6112 of 2004 is complied with. Therefore, no further cause of action would survive for maintaining the present petition. Signature Not Verified 6. Digitally Signed Signed by: JYOSTNARANI MAJHEE Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 18-May-2023 17:35:38 Accordingly, the CONTC is dropped. (M.S. Sahoo) jyostna Judge Page 4 of 4