IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5458 of 2008 VIJAY KUMAR SINHA Versus THE R.G.,GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Mukeshwar Dayal, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Central Government Counsel. ----- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal -------- Dated, the 18th August, 2008. In the Original Application, filed by the petitioner before the Central Administrative Tribunal, following order came to be passed on 26th October, 1999 – “ In view of the above analysis of the case, we dispose of this O.A. In terms of our direction as contained at para 8 above and further by directing the respondents to consider the case of the applicant for granting him continuity in service as Computer with effect from 1.3.1971 in the light of principle laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 3819/89 (supra) and observations made by us hereinabove and pass appropriate order within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to the costs.” 2. The petitioner raised a grievance of non-compliance before the Central Administrative Tribunal by filing contempt petition being CCPA No. 76 of 2000. The said contempt petition came to be disposed of by an order dated 31st August, 2004 thus - “Hence, in the interest of justice taking a lenient view in the matter, the notices issued to the contemners are hereby discharged while accepting unconditional apology and contempt proceedings, if any, initiated against them are also dropped, but with directions to the contemners or the - 2 - concerned respondents to comply with the orders passed by this Court in the aforesaid OA in its letter and spirit within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Resultantly, the order dated the 16th March, 2000 (Annexure A/4), also stands quashed.” 3. Yet another contempt application was filed by the petitioner before the Central Administrative Tribunal being CCPA 62 of 2006 for non-compliance of the order dated 26th October, 1999 as well as the order dated 29th September, 2004. 4. The said contempt application has been disposed of on 4th July, 2007. In the said CCPA, the Tribunal observed thus- “Under these circumstances, we do not find that the respondents have shown any disrespect to the orders of the Tribunal. In the beginning they had issued some contemptuous orders but they quickly corrected their mistakes and issued appropriate orders in the year 2005. Since they have corrected their mistakes there is no apparent malafide in this process. There is apparently no contempt court also. The CCPA, therefore, fails. Notices issued to the respondents are discharged.” 5. If the Tribunal rejected the contempt applications holding that there was no disrespect to the orders of the Tribunal, we are afraid, we find no justifiable reason to substitute the view of the Tribunal by holding otherwise. 6. Writ petition has no merit and is dismissed in limine. R. M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J. Anil/