IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CLCON NO. 152 OF 2010 Vijay Kumar Nautiyal …..Petitioner. Versus Vijay Kumar Dhaundiyal and another. …..Respondents. Present : Mr. M.S. Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner. Date of Decision: 28.9.2010 Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The petitioner has filed this contempt petition on the ground that the order dated 20.6.2008 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1542 of 2004 has not been complied with. In the writ petition, the petitioner had prayed that he be promoted from Assistant Lecturer Civil Engineering to the post of Lecturer (Civil Engineering) in Government Polytechnic, Gauchar, District Chamoli. The said writ petition was disposed of with the following order: “1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner to issue writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to promote the petitioner on the post of Lecturer (Civil Engineering) in Government Polytechnic on promotion quota in accordance with relevant service Rules form the date when he became eligible and qualified to be promoted to the post of Lecturer. 2. Hard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the promotion quota is to be filled up on the post of Lecturer which is higher post. The promotion post is not being filled up from the feeding cadre and is being deliberately withheld. It is also alleged that the direct recruitments are being made. 4. In the counter affidavit, it has been stated by the respondents in Para 10 that the process for promotion is in progress. This counter affidavit was filed in the month of May 2005. In view of this statement, the respondents are directed to complete the process of promotion from the feeding cadre in accordance with law within a period of one month from the date of production of certified copy of this order. 5. The petition is disposed of finally.” 2 3. As it is clear the only direction of the Court was that since the process of promotion is already on, the promotion from the feeding cadre be made in accordance with law. The petitioner now contends that the petitioner has not been promoted and juniors to the petitioner have been promoted, and as such, order dated 20.6.2008 passed by this Court has been violated. This contention of the petitioner is absolutely misconceived. There was no positive direction of this Court to promote the petitioner but there was only direction that the promotion be made in accordance with law. The promotion exercise which has taken place subsequent to the order of this Court could have been challenged by the petitioner by filing another writ petition. However, by no stretch of imagination is there any contempt of Court committed by the respondents. This Court does not find it a fit case where even a notice be sent to the respondents. 4. The instant contempt petition is totally devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. 5. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 28.9.2010 Rathour