IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Civil Contempt Petition No. 271 of 2007. Hem Chander Chunal, S/O Late Kheema Nand Chunal, At present Constable (A.P.) No. 8 Police Line Pauri, District Pauri Garhwal. … Petitioner. Vs. Sri N.S. Napalchiyal and others. .. Respondents Sri S.S.Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner-applicant. Sri Sudhir Kumar, learned Brief Holder for the respondents Date March 25, 2009. P.C.: Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. Heard Sri S.S.Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sudhir Kumar, learned Brief Holder for the respondents. This contempt petition has been moved by the petitioner for punishing the respondents for flouting the Court’s order dated 19- 2-2007 passed in Writ Petition No. 778 (S/S) of 2001, Hem Chandra Chaunal Vs. State of Uttaranchal and others, whereby the order of punishment passed against petitioner was set aside and it was directed that the petitioner be reinstated on his post with consequential service benefits. A perusal of the record shows that in compliance of the order dated 19-2-2007 passed by this Court, affidavit of compliance has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 5. paragraph no. 4 of this affidavit is relevant, which reads as under:- “That in the present contempt petition earlier on 27-12- 2007 affidavit of compliance was filed on behalf of the respondent no.4-Supreintendent of Police, District Pauri Garhwal wherein it was specifically placed before the Hon’ble Court that in compliance of the direction of this Hon’ble Court dated 19th February 2007 passed in Writ Petition No. 778 (S/S) of 2007; the petitioner has been reinstated in service with all consequential benefits such as annual increment, one month additional salary of every year during the period when he was out of service w.e.f. 21-1-2000 till the date of reinstatement, bonus and all other admissible allowances. Thus, in view of above the instant contempt petition is not liable to continue as the petitioner has been reinstated with all consequential benefits of service vide order dated 28th April 2007; as such, the present contempt petition has been rendered infructuous. Copy of the said orders dated 28th April 2007 & 22nd May 2007 were already filed and marked as Annexure Nos.-1 to the said affidavit of compliance filed earlier by the respondent no.4- Superintendent of Police. District Pauri Garhwal.” The petitioner has not denied the above fact that the petitioner had been reinstated on the post of constable and annual increments and one month’s additional salary for each completed year had been paid. It is thus evident that the order dated 19-2-2007 has been complied with by the concerned Superintendent of Police. The contempt petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed outright. The contempt petition is dismissed. Notices issued to the respondents are hereby discharged. (B.S.Verma,J.) RCP