S) (Amlesh Kumar Pandey v. State of U. P. and Others) to the Contempt Petition, in the interest of

Sri Ramesh Pandey, Iearned Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the appellants, after arguing the matter at some length, states that this intraCourt appeal may be dismissed as withdrawn as the appellants wish to file a review petition before the learned Single Judge. Sri Ramesh Kumar Srivastava, learned Counsel for the sole respondent is present. The Special Appeal is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. स्पलेशल अपनील मम पकाररत मका० उच्च न्रकारकालर कले उक्ति चनरर्यार चदनकासंक 24-5-2018 कले क्रम मम ररट रकाचचकका ससंख्रका-7505 (एसएस) / 2011 अमललेश ककमकार पकाण्डलेर बनकाम उत्तर प्रदलेश सरककार व अन्र मम पकाररत चनरर्यार चदनकासंक 15-09-2017 कले चवरुद्ध ररव्रमू रकाचचकका ससंख्रका 69300/2018 रकोलजत ककी गरनी हह जको अभनी मका० न्रकारकालर कले समक्ष चवचकारकाधिनीन हह। ररट रकाचचकका ससंख्रका-7505 (एसएस) / 2011 अमललेश ककमकार पकाण्डलेर बनकाम उत्तर प्रदलेश सरककार व अन्र मम पकाररत चनरर्यार चदनकासंक 15-09-2017 कका अनकपकालन न चकरले जकानले कले ककारर मका० उच्च न्रकारकालर, लखनऊ पनीठ लखनऊ मम रकोलजत अवमकाननकावकाद मम चदनकासंक 28-05-2018 कको चनम्न आदलेश पकाररत चकरले गरले हह:- Mr. Swaraj Singh, Director, Agriculture, opposite party is present. Counter affidavit on behalf of opposite party filed today in Court is taken on record. Mr. Ramesh Pandey, learned Chief Standing Counsel appearing for opposite party submits that special appeal filed against the order of writ Court has been dismissed with liberty to file review petition. The review petition is under preparation and it would be filed shortly. It is to be noted that the writ Court vide judgment and order dated 15.9.2017 passed in Writ Petition No. 7505 (SS) of 2011 has directed the opposite party to examine the claim of petitioner for regularization of services in accordance with the provisions of U.P. Regularization of Daily Wages Appointment on Group 'D' Post Rules, 2001, as amended from time to time in the light of the observations made in the judgment including the law as laid down in the case of Jandardan Yadav Vs. State of U.P.; Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 38170 of 2005. The compliance affidavit filed earlier by the opposite party has not been accepted by this Court and one more opportunity was given to make complete compliance of the writ Court order. Mr. Swaraj Singh, Director, Agriculture present in the Court states that the petitioner would be regularized in compliance of the writ Court order, however, that may he subject to decision in the review petition. It is also submitted that since a large number of similarly situated agricultural labourers are working in the agriculture department, As such, it may not be treated as precedence. In this view of the matter, 15 days' time hereby provided to the opposite party to pass necessary orders with regard to the compliance of the writ Court direction and ensure that the order of the writ Court is complied in true letter and spirit. However, the order so passed shall be subject to the decision so taken in the review petition, if any, preferred by the opposite party and it may not be treated as precedence. In view of order passed today, the counter affidavit filed on behalf of opposite party is rejected. List on 10.7.2018. In case the order of the writ Court is not complied by the next date, the opposite party present today will appear again. समस्त वचरर्यात सस्थचत सले स्पष्ट हह चक शनी पकाण्डलेर शकासनकादलेशयों मम दनी गई व्रवस्थकाओसं कले अनकरूप चवचनरचमतनीकरर हलेतक पकात्र नहहीं हह , परन्तक प्रश्नगत ररट रकाचचकका 7505 (एसएस) /2011 मम पकाररत चनरर्यार चदनकासंक 15-09-2017 एवसं तद्क्रम मम रकोलजत अवमकाननकावकाद ससंख्रका-338 (सनी)/2018-अमललेश ककमकार पकाण्डलेर बनकाम शनी सकोरकाज लससंह, ककचषि चनदलेशक, उत्तर प्रदलेश मम पकाररत आदलेश चदनकासंक 28-05-2018 कले समकादर मम चवलधिक बकाध्रतका कले दृचष्टगत शनी अमललेश ककमकार पकाण्डलेर कको जनपदनीर चतकथर्या शलेरनी कले पद पर चवचनरचमत करनले हलेतक चनरकचक्ति प्रकालधिककारनी कको इस प्रचतबसंधि कले सकाथ आदलेचशत चकरका जकातका हह चक शनी पकाण्डलेर कका चवचनरमचतकरर आदलेश ररट रकाचचकका ससंख्रका -7505 (एसएस) / 2011 अमललेश ककमकार पकाण्डलेर बनकाम उत्तर प्रदलेश सरककार व अन्र मम पकाररत मका० न्रकारकालर कले चनरर्यार चदनकासंक 15-09-2017 कले चवरुद्ध रकोलजत ररव्रमू रकाचचकका ससंख्रका 69300/2018 मम पकाररत हकोनले वकालले असन्तम चनरर्यार कले अधिनीन रहलेगका। रह आदलेश मका० न्रकारकालर कले आदलेशयों कले क्रम मम चवलधिक बकाध्रतका कले दृचष्टगत चकरका जका रहका हह। अतह मका० न्रकारकालर कले आदलेश चदनकासंक 28-05-2018 मम दनी गई स्पष्ट व्रवस्थका कले क्रम मम रह चकसनी भनी अन्र प्रकरर मम दृष्टकासंत नहहीं हकोगका।"

5. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that at the same time, the aforesaid contempt proceeding was challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 19007-19008 of 2018 and the notice was issued to the petitioner subject to deposit of Rs. 30,000/- as litigation expenses and the contempt proceeding was stayed and thereafter the then Director Agriculture passed an order ated 10.10.2018 by which the implementation of earlier regularization order dated 09.07.2018 was kept in abeyance on the basis of interim order dated 27.07.2018 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid special leave petition. The order dated 27.07.2018 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 19007-19008 of 2018 and order dated 10.10.2018 passed by the then Director Agriculture, Uttar Pradesh are as under:- "UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following ORDER Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that in the Order dated 15.09.2017 passed by the High Court while allowing the writ petition a direction was given to the competent authority to examine the case of the respondent herein for regularization of services in accordance with the provisions of U.P. Regularization of Daily Wages Appointment on Group 'D' Post Rules, 2001. Не further submits that the case of the respondent was duly considered and rejected on 20.02.2018 by the competent authority by giving detailed reasons. Therefore, in strict sense, there is no contempt of the High Court as the direction to consider the case of the respondent was complied with. It is further argued that the petitioner has also filed a review petition seeking review of the Order dated 15.09.2017 which is still pending. In these circumstances, at this juncture, no such order should have been passed by the High Court directing the petitioner appointment to the respondent on regular basis. to give Issue notice, returnable in two weeks. In the meantime, the operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed. Since the respondent is working as a fourth class employee, a sum of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) shall be deposited by the petitioner for paying it to the respondent as litigation expenses." "ककारकार्यालर जकाप मका० उच्च न्रकारकालर इलकाहकाबकाद लखनऊ पनीठ लखनऊ मम रकोलजत ररट रकाचचकका ससंख्रका-7505/एस.एस/2011 अमललेश ककमकार पकाण्डलेर बनकाम उ०प्र० सरककार व अन्र मम पकाररत मका० न्रकारकालर कले चनरर्यार चदनकासंक 15.09.2017 व तत्क्रम मम रकोलजत चवचकारकाधिनीन अवमकाननकावकाद ससंख्रका 338 (सनी) / 2018 अमललेश ककमकार पकाण्डलेर बनकाम सकोरकाज लससंह, ककचषि चनदलेशक, उत्तर प्रदलेश मम पकाररत, मका० न्रकारकालर कले आदलेश चदनकासंक 28.05.2018 कले आधिकार पर प्रश्नगत प्रकरर मम पकाररत मका० उच्च न्रकारकालर कले चनरर्यार चदनकासंक 15.09.2017 कले अनकपकालन मम ककचषि चनदलेशक, उ०प्र० दकारका शनी पकाण्डलेर ककी चतकथर्या शलेरनी (जनपदनीर) कले पद पर चवचनरचमतनीकरर हलेतक चनरकचक्ति प्रकालधिककारनी कको ककारकार्यालर जकाप ससंख्रका-मक०प्र० (।।)/1831/ एच.ए.सनी.-9/ चदनकासंक 09.07.2018 जकारनी चकरका गरका थका। प्रश्नगत अवमकाननकावकाद मम पकाररत मका० न्रकारकालर कले आदलेश चदनकासंक 28.05.2018 कको मका0 सवरच्च न्रकारकालर मम चकनमौतनी दलेतले हहए चवशलेषि अनकजका रकाचचकका ससंख्रका -19007- 19008/2018 सकोरकाज लससंह, ककचषि चनदलेशक, बनकाम अमललेश ककमकार पकाण्डलेर रकोलजत ककी गरनी, लजसमम सकनवकाई उपरकान्त मका० सवरच्च न्रकारकालर नले अवमकाननकावकाद कले आदलेश चदनकासंक 28.05.2018 कले चक्ररकान्वरन पर रकोक लगकातले हहरले आदलेश चदनकासंक 27.7.2018 पकाररत चकरका हह, लजसकका प्रभकावनी असंश चनम्न प्रककार हह :- Issue notice, returnable in two weeks. In the meantime, the operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed. Since the respondent is working as a fourth class employee, a sum of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) shall be deposited by the petitioner for paying it to the respondent as litigation expenses. उक्ति आदलेश कले अनकक्रम मम चनदलेशकालर कले ककारकार्यालर जकाप ससंख्रका- मक०प्र० (II) / 1831 / चदनकासंक 09.07.2018 कले चक्ररकान्वरन कको अचग्रिम आदलेशयों तक स्थचगत चकरका जकातका हह।"

6. It is vehemently submitted that the aforesaid S.L.P. was registered as Civil Appeal No. 6200-6201 of 2021 which was allowed subject to decision of the Special Appeal. The order dated 04.10.2021 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid Civil Appeal No. 6200-6201 of 2021 is as under:- "Leave granted. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant/the State Department has filed a Special Appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court against the dismissal of the Review Petition on 25.09.2019, as it has been advised that such a Special Appeal is maintainable under the High Court rules. The Special Appeal is stated to be listed tomorrow. Our order dated 27.07.2018 would show that while allowing the Writ Petition vide order dated 15.09.2017 a direction was given to the competent authority to examine the case of the respondent for regularization of service in accordance with the provisions of U.P. Regularization of Daily Wages Appointment on Group 'D' Post Rules, 2001. The case of the respondent was considered and was rejected on 20.02.2018 by the competent authority after giving reasons. That being the position, in our view, it could have given rise to fresh cause of action and not in contempt proceedings issuing a direction to appoint the respondent when the earlier order was only to the effect that his case for regularization would be considered in accordance with the rules. In view of the aforesaid position, we set aside the impugned orders dated 28.05.2018 and 10.07.2018 with the direction that the State Department will abide by the result of the Special Appeal or any other proceeding which may arise therefrom. The appeals are allowed in the aforesaid terms leaving parties to bear their own costs. We may note at the end that as per learned counsel, the appellant since stands retired."

6. It is also evident from the record that the review petition was dismissed and thereafter Special Appeal filed by the State was also dismissed on 10.04.2024, therefore, the regularization order dated 09.07.2018 has attained finality but the respondent authority failed to consider all these facts and rejected the claim of the petitioner in the most mechanical manner in utter violation of the observation made by this Court in the judgment and order dated 15.09.2017 in Writ Petition No. 7505 of 2011, therefore, the application for discharge of the contempt notice and the affidavit of compliance filed on 04.10.2024 and affidavit of compliance filed today are hereby rejected.

7. List this case on 26.05.2025 at 11: 30 a.m.

8. In the meantime, it is open for the respondent to take fresh decision and file and affidavit of compliance, failing which the respondent shall appear in person before this Court for the purposes of framing of charges. Order Date :- 29.4.2025 (Manoj K.)

Sri Ramesh Pandey, Iearned Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the appellants, after arguing the matter at some length, states that this intraCourt appeal may be dismissed as withdrawn as the appellants wish to file a review petition before the learned Single Judge. Sri Ramesh Kumar Srivastava, learned Counsel for the sole respondent is present. The Special Appeal is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. स्पलेशल अपनील मम पकाररत मका० उच्च न्रकारकालर कले उक्ति चनरर्यार चदनकासंक 24-5-2018 कले क्रम मम ररट रकाचचकका ससंख्रका-7505 (एसएस) / 2011 अमललेश ककमकार पकाण्डलेर बनकाम उत्तर प्रदलेश सरककार व अन्र मम पकाररत चनरर्यार चदनकासंक 15-09-2017 कले चवरुद्ध ररव्रमू रकाचचकका ससंख्रका 69300/2018 रकोलजत ककी गरनी हह जको अभनी मका० न्रकारकालर कले समक्ष चवचकारकाधिनीन हह। ररट रकाचचकका ससंख्रका-7505 (एसएस) / 2011 अमललेश ककमकार पकाण्डलेर बनकाम उत्तर प्रदलेश सरककार व अन्र मम पकाररत चनरर्यार चदनकासंक 15-09-2017 कका अनकपकालन न चकरले जकानले कले ककारर मका० उच्च न्रकारकालर, लखनऊ पनीठ लखनऊ मम रकोलजत अवमकाननकावकाद मम चदनकासंक 28-05-2018 कको चनम्न आदलेश पकाररत चकरले गरले हह:- Mr. Swaraj Singh, Director, Agriculture, opposite party is present. Counter affidavit on behalf of opposite party filed today in Court is taken on record. Mr. Ramesh Pandey, learned Chief Standing Counsel appearing for opposite party submits that special appeal filed against the order of writ Court has been dismissed with liberty to file review petition. The review petition is under preparation and it would be filed shortly. It is to be noted that the writ Court vide judgment and order dated 15.9.2017 passed in Writ Petition No. 7505 (SS) of 2011 has directed the opposite party to examine the claim of petitioner for regularization of services in accordance with the provisions of U.P. Regularization of Daily Wages Appointment on Group 'D' Post Rules, 2001, as amended from time to time in the light of the observations made in the judgment including the law as laid down in the case of Jandardan Yadav Vs. State of U.P.; Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 38170 of 2005. The compliance affidavit filed earlier by the opposite party has not been accepted by this Court and one more opportunity was given to make complete compliance of the writ Court order. Mr. Swaraj Singh, Director, Agriculture present in the Court states that the petitioner would be regularized in compliance of the writ Court order, however, that may he subject to decision in the review petition. It is also submitted that since a large number of similarly situated agricultural labourers are working in the agriculture department, As such, it may not be treated as precedence. In this view of the matter, 15 days' time hereby provided to the opposite party to pass necessary orders with regard to the compliance of the writ Court direction and ensure that the order of the writ Court is complied in true letter and spirit. However, the order so passed shall be subject to the decision so taken in the review petition, if any, preferred by the opposite party and it may not be treated as precedence. In view of order passed today, the counter affidavit filed on behalf of opposite party is rejected. List on 10.7.2018. In case the order of the writ Court is not complied by the next date, the opposite party present today will appear again. समस्त वचरर्यात सस्थचत सले स्पष्ट हह चक शनी पकाण्डलेर शकासनकादलेशयों मम दनी गई व्रवस्थकाओसं कले अनकरूप चवचनरचमतनीकरर हलेतक पकात्र नहहीं हह , परन्तक प्रश्नगत ररट रकाचचकका 7505 (एसएस) /2011 मम पकाररत चनरर्यार चदनकासंक 15-09-2017 एवसं तद्क्रम मम रकोलजत अवमकाननकावकाद ससंख्रका-338 (सनी)/2018-अमललेश ककमकार पकाण्डलेर बनकाम शनी सकोरकाज लससंह, ककचषि चनदलेशक, उत्तर प्रदलेश मम पकाररत आदलेश चदनकासंक 28-05-2018 कले समकादर मम चवलधिक बकाध्रतका कले दृचष्टगत शनी अमललेश ककमकार पकाण्डलेर कको जनपदनीर चतकथर्या शलेरनी कले पद पर चवचनरचमत करनले हलेतक चनरकचक्ति प्रकालधिककारनी कको इस प्रचतबसंधि कले सकाथ आदलेचशत चकरका जकातका हह चक शनी पकाण्डलेर कका चवचनरमचतकरर आदलेश ररट रकाचचकका ससंख्रका -7505 (एसएस) / 2011 अमललेश ककमकार पकाण्डलेर बनकाम उत्तर प्रदलेश सरककार व अन्र मम पकाररत मका० न्रकारकालर कले चनरर्यार चदनकासंक 15-09-2017 कले चवरुद्ध रकोलजत ररव्रमू रकाचचकका ससंख्रका 69300/2018 मम पकाररत हकोनले वकालले असन्तम चनरर्यार कले अधिनीन रहलेगका। रह आदलेश मका० न्रकारकालर कले आदलेशयों कले क्रम मम चवलधिक बकाध्रतका कले दृचष्टगत चकरका जका रहका हह। अतह मका० न्रकारकालर कले आदलेश चदनकासंक 28-05-2018 मम दनी गई स्पष्ट व्रवस्थका कले क्रम मम रह चकसनी भनी अन्र प्रकरर मम दृष्टकासंत नहहीं हकोगका।"

5. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that at the same time, the aforesaid contempt proceeding was challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 19007-19008 of 2018 and the notice was issued to the petitioner subject to deposit of Rs. 30,000/- as litigation expenses and the contempt proceeding was stayed and thereafter the then Director Agriculture passed an order ated 10.10.2018 by which the implementation of earlier regularization order dated 09.07.2018 was kept in abeyance on the basis of interim order dated 27.07.2018 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid special leave petition. The order dated 27.07.2018 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 19007-19008 of 2018 and order dated 10.10.2018 passed by the then Director Agriculture, Uttar Pradesh are as under:- "UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following ORDER Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that in the Order dated 15.09.2017 passed by the High Court while allowing the writ petition a direction was given to the competent authority to examine the case of the respondent herein for regularization of services in accordance with the provisions of U.P. Regularization of Daily Wages Appointment on Group 'D' Post Rules, 2001. Не further submits that the case of the respondent was duly considered and rejected on 20.02.2018 by the competent authority by giving detailed reasons. Therefore, in strict sense, there is no contempt of the High Court as the direction to consider the case of the respondent was complied with. It is further argued that the petitioner has also filed a review petition seeking review of the Order dated 15.09.2017 which is still pending. In these circumstances, at this juncture, no such order should have been passed by the High Court directing the petitioner appointment to the respondent on regular basis. to give Issue notice, returnable in two weeks. In the meantime, the operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed. Since the respondent is working as a fourth class employee, a sum of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) shall be deposited by the petitioner for paying it to the respondent as litigation expenses." "ककारकार्यालर जकाप मका० उच्च न्रकारकालर इलकाहकाबकाद लखनऊ पनीठ लखनऊ मम रकोलजत ररट रकाचचकका ससंख्रका-7505/एस.एस/2011 अमललेश ककमकार पकाण्डलेर बनकाम उ०प्र० सरककार व अन्र मम पकाररत मका० न्रकारकालर कले चनरर्यार चदनकासंक 15.09.2017 व तत्क्रम मम रकोलजत चवचकारकाधिनीन अवमकाननकावकाद ससंख्रका 338 (सनी) / 2018 अमललेश ककमकार पकाण्डलेर बनकाम सकोरकाज लससंह, ककचषि चनदलेशक, उत्तर प्रदलेश मम पकाररत, मका० न्रकारकालर कले आदलेश चदनकासंक 28.05.2018 कले आधिकार पर प्रश्नगत प्रकरर मम पकाररत मका० उच्च न्रकारकालर कले चनरर्यार चदनकासंक 15.09.2017 कले अनकपकालन मम ककचषि चनदलेशक, उ०प्र० दकारका शनी पकाण्डलेर ककी चतकथर्या शलेरनी (जनपदनीर) कले पद पर चवचनरचमतनीकरर हलेतक चनरकचक्ति प्रकालधिककारनी कको ककारकार्यालर जकाप ससंख्रका-मक०प्र० (।।)/1831/ एच.ए.सनी.-9/ चदनकासंक 09.07.2018 जकारनी चकरका गरका थका। प्रश्नगत अवमकाननकावकाद मम पकाररत मका० न्रकारकालर कले आदलेश चदनकासंक 28.05.2018 कको मका0 सवरच्च न्रकारकालर मम चकनमौतनी दलेतले हहए चवशलेषि अनकजका रकाचचकका ससंख्रका -19007- 19008/2018 सकोरकाज लससंह, ककचषि चनदलेशक, बनकाम अमललेश ककमकार पकाण्डलेर रकोलजत ककी गरनी, लजसमम सकनवकाई उपरकान्त मका० सवरच्च न्रकारकालर नले अवमकाननकावकाद कले आदलेश चदनकासंक 28.05.2018 कले चक्ररकान्वरन पर रकोक लगकातले हहरले आदलेश चदनकासंक 27.7.2018 पकाररत चकरका हह, लजसकका प्रभकावनी असंश चनम्न प्रककार हह :- Issue notice, returnable in two weeks. In the meantime, the operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed. Since the respondent is working as a fourth class employee, a sum of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) shall be deposited by the petitioner for paying it to the respondent as litigation expenses. उक्ति आदलेश कले अनकक्रम मम चनदलेशकालर कले ककारकार्यालर जकाप ससंख्रका- मक०प्र० (II) / 1831 / चदनकासंक 09.07.2018 कले चक्ररकान्वरन कको अचग्रिम आदलेशयों तक स्थचगत चकरका जकातका हह।"

6. It is vehemently submitted that the aforesaid S.L.P. was registered as Civil Appeal No. 6200-6201 of 2021 which was allowed subject to decision of the Special Appeal. The order dated 04.10.2021 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid Civil Appeal No. 6200-6201 of 2021 is as under:- "Leave granted. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant/the State Department has filed a Special Appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court against the dismissal of the Review Petition on 25.09.2019, as it has been advised that such a Special Appeal is maintainable under the High Court rules. The Special Appeal is stated to be listed tomorrow. Our order dated 27.07.2018 would show that while allowing the Writ Petition vide order dated 15.09.2017 a direction was given to the competent authority to examine the case of the respondent for regularization of service in accordance with the provisions of U.P. Regularization of Daily Wages Appointment on Group 'D' Post Rules, 2001. The case of the respondent was considered and was rejected on 20.02.2018 by the competent authority after giving reasons. That being the position, in our view, it could have given rise to fresh cause of action and not in contempt proceedings issuing a direction to appoint the respondent when the earlier order was only to the effect that his case for regularization would be considered in accordance with the rules. In view of the aforesaid position, we set aside the impugned orders dated 28.05.2018 and 10.07.2018 with the direction that the State Department will abide by the result of the Special Appeal or any other proceeding which may arise therefrom. The appeals are allowed in the aforesaid terms leaving parties to bear their own costs. We may note at the end that as per learned counsel, the appellant since stands retired."

6. It is also evident from the record that the review petition was dismissed and thereafter Special Appeal filed by the State was also dismissed on 10.04.2024, therefore, the regularization order dated 09.07.2018 has attained finality but the respondent authority failed to consider all these facts and rejected the claim of the petitioner in the most mechanical manner in utter violation of the observation made by this Court in the judgment and order dated 15.09.2017 in Writ Petition No. 7505 of 2011, therefore, the application for discharge of the contempt notice and the affidavit of compliance filed on 04.10.2024 and affidavit of compliance filed today are hereby rejected.

7. List this case on 26.05.2025 at 11: 30 a.m.

8. In the meantime, it is open for the respondent to take fresh decision and file and affidavit of compliance, failing which the respondent shall appear in person before this Court for the purposes of framing of charges. Order Date :- 29.4.2025 (Manoj K.)