news details |
|
|
| Warrants against outgoing CS, others | | | Early Times Reporter
Jammu | June 1
As the outgoing Chief Secretary BR Kundal awaits his induction in the state cabinet, there is a court warrant in the service for security his presence in the court in a contempt case.
Justice Nirmal Singh of Jammu and Kashmir High Court in a contempt petition has directed the Registry to secure the presence of Kundal, GA Peer Secretary Education, AK Raina Director School Education Jammu, Vinay Mohan Raina CEO Udhampur and ON Bhat ZEO Ghordi Tehsil Ramnagar. The execution of warrant through concerned SSP.
While directing the registry for issuance of bailable warrants Justice Nirmal Singh further observed that respondents have been served through registered covers, after service ZEO ON Bhat appeared before the registry on May 5, 2008. Despite service there is no representation on behalf of the respondents; registry is directed to secure their presence through bailable warrants to the tune of Rs 5000/- each to be executed by the concerned SSP.
These bailable warrants issued in a contempt petition filed by Romesh Chander through Adv Dhiraj Choudhary in which it has been submitted that the petitioner who is working in the education dept at present in the office of ZEO Ghordi was arrested in a case u/s 363/376/509 RPC and was placed under suspension vide order dated November 11, 1989. Vide judgment of Sessions Judge Udhampur dated February 27, 1997, Court dismissed the challan and acquitted the petitioner on the ground that the prosecution has not established the case against the petitioner and prosecution story is highly doubtful. The petitioner was reinstate on July 7, 1997, the petitioner who was remained under suspension for a period of about 8 years was not paid any emoluments during that period. This period of suspension was not settled by the respondents and the petitioner filed a petition which was decided on October 11, 2006 by the High Court. The High Court while disposing of the petition directed the respondents to settle the suspension period of the petitioner in accordance with the rules. As per the petitioner, the respondents willful intentional and deliberate have committed the contempt of the High Court and filed present contempt petition with the prayer for initiating contempt proceedings against the respondents. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
