ASHOK SINGH BALI v. RAKESH KUMAR SARANGAL,DIR.SCHOOL EDUCATION AND ANR.
CPSW/563/2018 · 2025-05-14
Javed Iqbal Wani
Contempt Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 5655 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 5655 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
Case No. CPSW No. 563/2018 in
SWP No. 2081/2013 277/2018
Ashok Singh Bali
…..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Gagan Oswal, Advocate q
vs
Rakesh Kumar Sarangal and anr. .…. Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. P.D Singh, Dy. AG Sh. Bikram Singh, Chief Education Officer, Ramban is present in person. Dr. Naseem Javed Choudhary, Director of School Education Jammu is present in person.
Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE
ORDER 14.05.2025
1. In the instant contempt petition, the petitioner herein has alleged non- compliance of order dated 25.04.2018 passed in SWP No. 2081/2013. 2. Facts emerging from the record would reveal that the petitioner herein had preferred the aforesaid SWP No. 2081/2013 before this Court on the premise that he had participated in the process of selection against the Rehbar-e- Taleem Teacher advertised by the respondents in the year 2005, consequent to which selection, one Kashu Ram, respondents No. 6 in the petition filed by the petitioner came to be appointed and consequently regularised as a General Line Teacher in the year 2011 after completion of five year of service and that in the year 2015 the salary of said Kashu Ram came to be withheld by the officials on the ground that the certificate furnished by him at the time of selection/appointment was found to be fake and since the petitioner herein has been next in order of merit in the said selection, he requires to be appointed in place of the said Kashu Ram. S. No. 70
2
CPSW No. 563/2018 in SWP No. 2081/2013
3. The said Kashu Ram also filed a petition being SWP No. 132/2016 challenging therein order dated 06.01.2016, whereby his salary was withheld. 4.
Both aforesaid petitions one filed by the Kashu Ram and the other by the present petitioner Ashok Singh Bali came to be clubbed and considered by this court and finally disposed of in terms of order dated 25.04.2018 and while the petition filed by the above Kashu Ram was allowed and the order under challenged therein dated 06.01.2016 was quashed with a liberty to the official respondents therein to conduct an enquiry qua the certificates of said Kashu Ram and to pass a speaking order after affording an opportunity of hearing to said Kashu Ram, providing further that depending upon the outcome the said enquiry, the said Kashu Ram shall be entitled to the release of the salary, the petition filed by the present petitioner Ashok Singh Bali came to be disposed of by observing that in view of the direction of holding of enquiry ordered in the writ petition of Kashu Ram however, the petitioner Ashok Singh Bali shall be at liberty to take recourse to such remedy as may be available to him under law while qualifying that the Court did not express any opinion with regard to the merits of the claims of the parties. 5. The petitioner herein Ashok Singh Bali while maintaining the instant contempt petition alleges that the official respondents did not take a decision in tune with the directions passed on 25.04.2018 regarding the holding of enquiry and thus observed the order passed by this Court in breach. 6. Respondents/contemnors during the pendency of the instant contempt petition initially filed as statement of facts on 27.05.2019 accompanied with an order of Constitution of a committee for holding enquiry in the matter and in the another set of statement of facts filed on 11.05.2022 accompanied with order dated 07.05.2022 have stated that the certificates of Kashu Ram stands verified from the concerned Board(s) and were found genuine and that the
3
CPSW No. 563/2018 in SWP No. 2081/2013
claim and allegations of Ashok Singh Bali petitioner herein are accordingly rejected. 7. Having regard to the aforesaid specific stand taken by the respondents/contemnors, seemingly the respondents had complied with the
order, non-compliance of which has been complained of in the instant contempt petition.
8. Accordingly contempt notices issued are recalled and contempt proceedings are closed.
9. The petitioner herein is at liberty to work out a remedy in the matter, as may be available under law.
(Javed Iqbal Wani)
Judge Jammu 14.05.2025 Rahul Sharma