IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL. Time Extension Application No. 3709/2009 Delay condonation application No. 4572/2009 With Civil Contempt Petition No. 61/2009 Kailash Nath Harbola ………… Petitioner Versus Smt. Kusum Pant and others .. Respondents. Mr. Bhagwat Singh Mehra, holding brief of Mr. Manoj Tewari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. M.C. Tewari, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the respondents. Oral Judgment ( Per: Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J.) Heard on delay condonation application and perused the affidavit filed in support thereto. The delay condonation application is allowed and the delay in filing the response is hereby condonded. The affidavit of compliance filed by the learned C.S.C. is taken on record. By way of this contempt petition, filed under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, the petitioner has prayed for summoning the respondents and punishing them for willful disobedience of the judgment and order dated 25-7-2008, passed by this court in W.P. No. 4089(S/S) of 2001, Kailash Nath Harbola Vs. Secretary U.P. Secondary Education Service Commission and others. The relevant portion of the impugned judgment reads as follows:- “It is settled law that once a writ petition deserves to be allowed on one ground, other grounds are unnecessary to be dealt with. Since the Division Bench has also agreed that there was no approval of termination order under Section 21 of U.P. Secondary Education (Services Selection Boards) Act, 1982, therefore, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 10-12-1992 (Annexure No. XII to the writ petition) is 2 quashed. However, it is made clear that it is open for the Committee of Management to proceed in accordance with law afresh.” The response has been filed by the respondent No.3, along with affidavit of compliance and in paragraph Nos. 4 and 5, the following averments have been made:- “4. That in compliance of the direction of the Hon’ble Court, the Committee of Management has considered the case of petitioner afresh and passed the dismissal order against petitioner from service vide order dated 15-4-2009 and the same has been approved by District Education Officer, Almora, copy of the said order dated 15-4-2009 is being filed herewith and marked as Annexure No.1 to this affidavit. 5. that in view of above stated facts and circumstances it is being submitted that in case the petitioner is aggrieved from the order dated 15-4- 2009 he can assail the same by way of filing fresh writ petition but so far the present contempt petition is concerned the present contempt filed by the petitioner against the answering respondent/deponent is liable to be dismissed and the contempt notice issued to the answering respondent/deponent are liable to be discharged with as the directions of the Hon’ble Court issued vide judgment/ order dated 25-7-2008 has been fully complied with.” From perusal of the aforesaid averments made in the affidavit of compliance, it becomes clear that the case of the petitioner was considered afresh after the order passed by this Court and the dismissal order was passed against him vide order dated 15-4-2009 and the same has been approved by District Education Officer, 3 Almora. Copy of the aforesaid order has been filed as Annexure No.1, along with affidavit of compliance. I am of the view that in compliance of the order passed by this court the respondent has considered the matter afresh in accordance with law and passed the order accordingly. Therefore, I do not find any justification to continue the contempt proceedings against the respondents any further. Accordingly, the contempt petition is dismissed. The notices issued against the respondents are hereby discharged. Dated: 25-6-2009 (B.C. Kandpal, J.) ISB