http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1  

PETITIONER: UNION OF INDIA

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: SATYA PRAKASH VASISHT

DATE OF JUDGMENT20/09/1993

BENCH:

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT: ORDER 1.   Special leave granted. 2.   Heard counsel on both sides. 3.   We are afraid the impugned order of the Tribunal cannot be  sustained.  The facts clearly reveal  that  against  the order  of  transfer the appellant herein  had  obtained  ad- interim  stay  from the Tribunal.  While that  stay  was  in operation,  he came to be relieved from his post on  October 4, 1991, which was clearly contrary to the letter and spirit of  the  Tribunal’s order.  It is, therefore,  difficult  to understand how the Tribunal could in such circumstances  say that  the  petition  had become infructuous.   In  fact  the appellant  can  have  a grievance that  the  respondent  had committed  contempt by not obeying the interim order of  the Tribunal.  We are not suggesting that any contempt action be taken  but surely the Tribunal could not have dismissed  the petition  of  the appellant merely because he  was  relieved with effect from October 4, 1991.  We, therefore, allow this appeal,  set aside the order of the Tribunal and  remit  the matter to the Tribunal to decide it in accordance with  law. There will be no order as to costs. 53