Asim Kumar Chatterjee v. Sh. V.I. Kantha Rao
Case at a glance
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. We find that in the order dated 23.10.2024, this Court noticed in para No.4 which held as under: ......(4.) The petitioner is working as UDC since 01.06.2004 and has thereafter, cleared the exam of Administrative Officer and is now working as Administrative Officer. However…
- Para 33. The order dated 10.08.2020 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur (for short, ‘CAT’) has been quoted by the petitioner held as under: “......(3) That, it would be pertinent to mention here that the Ld. Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur vide its order…
Judgment
1. Sh. V.I. Kantha Rao, Secretary, GOI, Ministry Of Mines, Room No. 320-A Wing, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi 110001
2. Sh. Asit Saha, Director General, GSI, Central Head Quarters, 27, Jawahar Lal Nehru Road, Kolkata 700016
3. Sh. Vijay Vishnupant Mugal, A.D.G. & H.O.D., GSI, Western Region, 15-16 Jhalana Institutional Area, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302004 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s)
: Ms. Priya Rastogi through VC For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI Order 24/07/2025
The contempt petition preferred by the petitioner is on the ground that the order dated 23.10.2024 passed by this Court has not been complied with.
We find that in the order dated 23.10.2024, this Court noticed in para No.4 which held as under:
......(4.) The petitioner is working as UDC since 01.06.2004 and has thereafter, cleared the exam of Administrative Officer and is now working as Administrative Officer. However, we deem it proper the stay operation of order dated 10.08.2020.
[2025:RJ-JP:27763-DB] (2 of 2) [CCP-692/2025]
The order dated 10.08.2020 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur (for short, ‘CAT’) has been quoted by the petitioner held as under: “......(3) That, it would be pertinent to mention here that the Ld. Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur vide its order dated 10.08.2020 (Which was reserved on 27.02.2020) allowed the OA. The Operative portion is reproduced as here under:-
The order dated 03.07.2007 (Annexure-A/2) granting promotion to Respondent No.4 on the post of UDC w.e.f. 01.06.2004 & the consequent seniority assigned to him vide seniority list circulated through letter dated 25.06.2009 (Annexure-A/1) are hereby quashed and set aside.
Before Central Administrative Tribunal Jaipur respondent no.4 was my client Asim Kumar Chatterjee. Who is directly affected by the order of CAT Jaipur as such, DBCWP filed by my client. (4.) That, it is also an admitted position that since the appointment of my client, the promotion were given by your department to my client time to time.”
From the perusal of the said order passed by CAT dated
10.08.2020 and the interim order passed by this Court. It is apparent that the seniority has been restored, therefore, seniority list circular vide order dated 25.06.2009 stands restored. Nothing further is required to be done at the end of the respondents. Hence, this contempt petition is found to be misconceived and dismissed accordingly. (CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J GAURAV SHARMA/Garima/24
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.