SHOORBEER SINGH NEGI vs Mrs Shashi Shalini, The Chief Post Master General, Uttarakhannd Circle, Dehradun and another on 28 October 2026

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH 61/35, COPERNICUS MARG,NEW DELHI-110001 Order Sheet Item no.: 6 C.P./371/2026 (NAINITAL) [ CONTEMPT PETITION ] [ SENIOR CITIZEN ] In O.A./3170/2024 RETIRAL BENEFITS Court No.: 999 No of Adjournment: 3 Order Dated: 28/10/2026 SHOORBEER SINGH NEGI Vs MRS SHASHI SHALINI, THE CHIEF POST MASTER GENERAL, UTTARAKHANND CIRCLE, DEHRADUN AND ANOTHER

For Applicant(s) Advocate : Mr. Devang Dobhal.

For Respondent(s) Advocate : Mr. T.C. Aggarwal. Order of The Tribunal Heard the parties.

2. The instant CP has been filed alleging wilful disobedience of the interim order dated 09.05.2025 passed in OA No. 3170/2024, and the respondents have challenged the said order in W.P. (S/B) No. 345/2025 before the Hon'ble High Court of Uttarakhand. Their Lordships, vide detailed order dated 18.09.2025, have upheld the order dated 09.05.2025 in the present CP.

3. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the respondents are wilfully flouting the order dated 09.05.2025, which has been upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Uttarakhand vide order dated 18.09.2025 and presses for initiation of contempt proceedings against the erring respondents.

4. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that they have filed SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide Diary No. 3745 and notice has been served on 21.08.206. He seeks further six weeks' time to file the full compliance affidavit. The learned counsel for the applicant vehemently opposes further grant of time to the respondents to file the compliance affidavit.

5. Heard. We have considered the matter.

6. The present Contempt Petition is arising out of the order dated 09.05.2025, which has already been upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Uttarakhand, and notice was issued on 28.04.2026. The respondents have neither filed any compliance reply affidavit/ Status report.

7. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bijay Kumar Mahanty Vs. Jadu, reported in (2003) 1 SCC 644. Their Lordships held as under:- “5. It is of paramount public interest that the people, after obtaining an order of the court, should not feel helpless or without any remedy when such order is flouted.

6. In Advocate General, State of Bihar v. M.P. Khair Industries [(1980) 3 SCC 311 : 1980 SCC (Cri) 688] this Court said that: (SCC p. 315, para 7) “It may be necessary to punish as a contempt, a course of conduct which abuses and makes a mockery of the judicial process and which thus extends its pernicious influence beyond the parties to the action and affects the interest of the public in the administration of justice. The public have an interest, an abiding and a real interest, and a vital stake in the effective and orderly administration of justice, because, unless justice is so administered, there is the peril of all rights and liberties perishing. The court has the duty of protecting the interest of the public in the due administration of justice and, so, it is entrusted with the power to commit for contempt of court, not in order to protect the dignity of the court against insult or injury as the expression ‘contempt of court’ may seem to suggest, but, to protect and to vindicate the right of the public that the administration of justice shall not be prevented, prejudiced, obstructed or interfered with.”

7. The rule of law is the foundation of the democratic society. The judiciary is the guardian of the rule of law. If the orders of the court are disobeyed with impunity by those who owe an obligation to the society to preserve the rule of law, not only would individual litigants suffer, the whole administration of justice would be brought into disrepute.” (emphasis supplied)

8. This Tribunal is conscious of the fact that while exercising restrain in initiating the Contempt Proceedings, various opportunities have been afforded to the respondents to file a compliance reply affidavit, but till date neither compliance affidavit nor status report has been filed.

9. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the respondents, as a last indulgence, one more opportunity is granted to the respondents to file a full compliance reply affidavit on or before the next date of hearing, failing which, Respondent No. 1- The Chief Post Master General, Uttarakhand Circle, Dehradun shall remain present before this Tribunal to explain the continued disobedience of the order dated 09.05.2025 of this Tribunal.

10. The Registry is directed to communicate a copy of the order passed today to the learned counsel for the respondents and the Respondent No. 1-The Chief Post Master General, Uttarakhand Circle, Dehradun, through Speed Post and also through other modes for information and compliance.

11. List the case on 17.12.2026 for further consideration.

12. The order passed today is to be uploaded on the website.

13. Order Dasti. Rajinder Kashyap Member (A) Ajay Pratap Singh Member (J) Abhay Chaudhary ( steno 'c' )