1992 (9) TMI 365

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to this Court from the Order dated July 3-7-1992 made by the High Court of Patna in M.J.C. No. 555 of 1992. 2. We have heard Shri Mukul Mudgal, learned Counsel for the Petitioners. The Respondents, though served, have remained unrepresented. Special leave granted. 3. The learned Single Judge of the High Court by his Order dated January 10-1-1992 quashed the order of termination of the servi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... initiated, it was necessary and appropriate for the Division Bench to examine the prayer for stay, or else, the appeal itself might become infructuous. This did not commend itself to the High Court which sought to proceed with the contempt first. We are afraid, the course adopted by the High Court does not commend itself as proper. If, without considering the prayer for stay, obedience to the Sing .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ration the prayer for stay either earlier or at least simultaneously with the complaint for contempt. To keep the prayer for stay stand-by and to insist upon proceeding with the complaint for contempt might in many conceivable cases, as here, cause serious prejudice. This is the view taken in State of J K v. Mohd. Yaqoob Khan. 6. In the present case, under the threat of proceedings of contemp .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X