1

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10238 OF 2017

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 20097 OF 2017 [DIARY NO. 20473/2017]

PRAVEER KUMAR PRINCIPAL SECRETARY  DEPARTMENT OF MEDICAL HEALTH AND FAMILY  WELFARE, GOVT. OF U.P. & ORS.  Appellant (s)

                               VERSUS REENA KUMARI & ORS.                          Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J. 1. Delay condoned.  Leave granted. 2. In the nature of the order we propose to pass in this case, it is not necessary to issue notice to the respondents. 3. The respondents had approached the High Court of Allahabad at Lucknow Bench alleging contempt on the part of the appellants for not having implemented the Judgments  dated  01.02.2013  and  21.10.2013  in  the proper perspective. 4. When the matter came up for consideration in the High Court in contempt jurisdiction, the High Court passed the following order on 21.04.2015 :-

“Heard  Dr.  L.P.  Mishra,  learned counsel  for  the  petitioner  and  the learned  standing  counsel  for  quite some time.

2

Dr.  Misra  has  painstakingly  pointed out to the Court that the directions in  the  bunch  of  the  writ  petition leading  being  W.P.  No.7868(SS)  2011 and  the  review  petition  no.  92  of 2013, there are clear directions for giving  preference  to  the  petitioners while  filling  up  the  vacancies  of three  thousands  Basic  Health  Workers (femala).  It  has  clearly  been mentioned  that  the  first  appointment has to be given to 195 petitioners and the remaining vacancies to be filled up  by  general  candidate.  If  the petitioners  had  become  overage,  the same  has  to  be  relaxed.  Moreover, working of the petitioners were never in  doubt  before  the  Court  in  the counter- affidavit filed in the writ petition. It has also not been claimed that the petitioners are not working. Hence,  this  position  cannot  be reviewed by asking for certificate of working/  experience  from  the respective  C.M.Os.  The  general advertisement will not be binding upon the petitioners, who form a class by themselves.  Under  the  concept  of equality  before  the  law,  the petitioner  cannot  be  treated  at  par with the general candidate and hence certain  requirements  of  verification etc. will not be applicable for say viz-a-viz the petitioners.  

3

In such a situation, this Court feels that  in  case  the  petitioners candidature has been rejected on the ground that their working certificates have  been  by  A.C.M.O.,  is  totally unacceptable for the reasons firstly; there  was  no  requirement  of  such certificate  and  secondly;  if  the certificates have been issued but not found correct by the opposite parties, their appointments could not have been denied on this ground. There appears to be some serious misgivings in the mind  of  the  opposite  parties,  hence the  compliance  of  the  Court's  order has  not  been  forthcoming.   Since the order has not been complied with,  this  Court  comes  to  the conclusion that prima-facie a case for committing contempt of Court, is made out.   However,  learned  standing  counsel submitted that he will advise in the light  of  observations  made  by  this Court today and the argument advanced by  Dr.L.P.  Mishra,  to  the  opposite parties.  Therefore,  on  his  request that the matter will be taken care of in  the  light  of  today's  discussion, this Court grants 15 days further time to the opposite parties to comply with the Court's order. In case compliance is  not  made,  opposite  party  no. 5-Principal  Secretary,  Department  of Medcial,  Health  and  Family  Welfare,

4

Lucknow along with opposite party no. 6 Dr. Vinay Laxmi, Director General, Medical  Healthy  and  Family  Welfare, U.P., Lucknow shall appear in person before this Court on 7.5.2015 to show- cause why action be not taken against them for committing contempt of this Court.”  

5. Ms.  Aishwarya  Bhati,  learned  counsel  appearing for  the  appellants,  submits  that  before  granting opportunity  to  the  appellants  to  submit  their explanation, the High Court might not have compelled the appearance of the Principal Secretaries and other officials.  We find substance in the submission made by the learned counsel.  Accordingly, we dispose of this  appeal  making  it  clear  that  after  the  court considering  the  explanation  offered  by  the appellants, in case it is found that explanation is not acceptable and that the appellants are otherwise liable  to  be  proceeded  against  in  contempt proceedings,  only  then  their  appearance  will  be insisted.

No costs.   .......................J.

             [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]  

.......................J.               [ R. BANUMATHI ]  

New Delhi; August 08, 2017.

5

ITEM NO.18               COURT NO.6               SECTION XI                S U P R E M E  C O U R T  O F  I N D I A                        RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Diary No(s). 20473/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 25-01-2017 in  SA  No.  368/2015  passed  by  the  High  Court  Of  Judicature  At Allahabad, Lucknow Bench) PRAVEER KUMAR PRINCIPAL SECRETARY  DEPARTMENT OF MEDICAL HEALTH AND FAMILY  WELFARE, GOVT. OF U.P. & ORS.  Petitioner(s)                                 VERSUS REENA KUMARI & ORS.                                Respondent(s) (CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING SLP)  (EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) Date : 08-08-2017 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM :  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH          HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI For Petitioner(s) Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, AAG, U.P.

Mr. Ardhendumauli Kumar Prasad, AOR Ms. Charu Ambwani, Adv.  

                   For Respondent(s)                      

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following                              O R D E R

Delay condoned.   Leave granted.  The  appeal  is  disposed  of  in  terms  of  the  signed

non-reportable Judgment Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(JAYANT KUMAR ARORA)                            (RENU DIWAN)   COURT MASTER                              ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

(Signed non-reportable Judgment is placed on the file)