Non-implementation of directions in Bhumesh Sharma case
Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, May 3: High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has issued direction for framing Robkar against Commissioner Secretary, General Administration Department (GAD) asking him to show cause as to why he should not be proceeded against and punished under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act.
The direction has been issued in a contempt petition filed by Bhumesh Sharma as orders of the High Court have not been implemented by the GAD despite lapse of considerable period of time.
“In terms of order dated March 18, 2024, the respondents were directed to file fresh compliance report/statement of facts as regards payment of consequential benefits to the petitioner by the next date of hearing failing which the Additional Secretary, GAD was to appear in person”, Justice Sanjay Dhar said, adding “statement of facts/compliance report has not been filed by the respondents nor the Additional Secretary, GAD has appeared in person in terms of the directions passed by the court”.
“It appears that respondents do not intend to comply with the judgment/order of the writ court which has attained finality”, Justice Dhar said and accordingly directed the Registry to frame Robkar against respondent number 2 (Commissioner Secretary GAD) asking him to show cause as to why he should not be proceeded against and punished under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act.
Vide writ court judgment dated February 7, 2017 the Government order regarding premature retirement of Bhumesh Sharma was quashed and the petitioner was directed to be reinstated in the service with all the consequential benefits within a period of one month of the judgment.
The judgment came to the challenged by the State before the Division Bench, which dismissed the same and it was left open to the respondents to go ahead with the inquiry stated to be pending against the petitioner. The SLP against the judgment of Division Bench was also dismissed by the Apex Court of the country as such the judgment of writ court acquired finality.
Pursuant to the judgments the respondents issued order whereby petitioner was reinstated. However, it was mentioned in the order that the consequential service benefits of the petitioner would be subject to outcome of the departmental proceedings/court cases pending, if any. In the statement of the facts dated September 2, 2023 nothing was intimated with regard the status of enquiries against the petitioner.
Accordingly, the High Court vide order dated March 18, 2024 directed the respondents to file fresh compliance report/statement of facts as regards payment of consequential benefits to the petitioner failing which Additional Secretary GAD shall appear in person.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
