Dear Urvashi. The citation for the SC Judgement is:-
http://www.judis.nic.in/supremecourt/qrydisp.aspx?filename=27636 Since you were represented by no less than 4 advocates and were still dismissed, perhaps you can share with us the following information:- 1) Which specific directions of the SC Judgement were not implemented in your opinion / pleadings thereby causing you to approach in Original Contempt Jurisdiction? I am caused to ask this because mere "general directions" not against any particular officer /Ministry without deadline (amounting to obiter ) do not engender "contempt". Furthermore it is not clear if the UP Government was a party to the Umadevi matter. Lastly, mere RTI applications do not give you cause of action to approach the SC in *ORIGINAL* Contempt Jurisdiction, especially as you are not a party in the Umadevi matter. You should also count yourself lucky that the Justices who heard you, did not take a stronger tack on you. Sarbajit --- In [email protected], "urvashi sharma" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Respected all, > Please go through the given case and send your suggestion to help me > decide the future course of action . > > In year 2006 , hon'ble supreme court's five judge constitutional > bench headed by hon'ble The chief justice of india while deciding > civil appeal nos. 3595-3612 of 1999 , 1861-2063,3849 of 2001 , 3520- > 24 of 2002 & 1968 of 2006 , delivered the judgement dated 10 april > 2006 .this judgement was reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1 .By this > judgement , hon. Supreme court gave general directions to central > govt. and all state governments & their instrumentalities to regulate > appointments. > > On 03 -07- 2007 , I moved a RTI application u/s 6 accompanied with > IPO of Rs. 10/- no. 57 E 210762 to the PIO of the office of the chief > secretary , uttar pradesh government to ask about the steps taken by > the state government in compliance of the abovementioned order of > hon'ble supreme court of india by speed post no. SPEU 948193976 IN > dtd. 03-07-07. Appeal u/s 19(1) of the RTI act was moved by me on 04- > 08-07 to the chief secretary , uttar pradesh government by speed post > no speu 926116646 in dtd. 04-08-07. when no info was given appeal u/s > 19(3) of the RTI act was moved to UP SIC on 13-09-07 under receipt > no. 34349.case no. S-14061/C/07 was registered and first hearing was > fixed on 24-10-07.in the meantime I received letter no. 52 su. Aa. / > ka. - 2 / 2007 lucknow dated 26 september 2007 from uttar pradesh > governmrnt.in this letter it was clearly mentioned that following > the said hon'ble supreme court order , the state government has not > taken any steps at all.in the hearing dated 24-10-2007 , nobody from > the chief secretary's office appeared and UP SIC again issued notice > and fixed next hearing for 28-11-2007.in hearing dated 28-11-2007 sri > shirsh dubey , joint secretary , u. p. government once again > reiterated that state govt. has not taken any steps following the > said hon'ble supreme court order.at this point IC sri V. K. Saxena > directed me to go to competent forum and disposed off the case. > As directed by the SIC , I filed diary no. 35626 of 2007 to register > contempt of hon'be supreme court case against P. K. Mishra , the > chief secretary of U. P. Government.My I. A. no. 92 0f 2007 came up > for hearing on 04-04-08 before hon'ble Supreme court of india and > hon'ble court delivered the given judgement- > > ITEM NO. 1 ,COURT NO.7, SECTION XVI > > SUPREME COURT OF INDIA > > RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS > > I.A. NO. 92 OF 2008 IN CIVIL APPEAL NOS.3595-3612 OF 1999 > > SMT. URVASHI SHARMA Appellant (s) > > VERSUS > > SRI P.K. MISHRA Respondent(s) > > (For Permission to file contempt Petition and office report) > > Date: 04/04/2008 > > These Appeals were called on for hearing today. > > CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.K. THAKKER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.K. > JAIN > > For Appellant(s) Mr. Imtiaz Ahmed, Adv. Md. Irshad Hanif, Adv. Dr. > Lal Bahadur, Adv. Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde,Adv. > > For Respondent(s) Mr. Naveen R. Nath ,Adv > > UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following ORDER > > In our opinion, the filing of contempt petition is ill-conceived. It > is open to the petitioner to take appropriate proceedings, in > accordance with law, on the basis of the judgment of this Court > reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1, Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors. vs. > Uma Devi & Ors. I.A.No.92 is dismissed. > > [ Usha Bhardwaj ] [ Vinod Kulvi] > Court Master Court Master > > Now I want to know from u all and specially the fellow advocates that > when > 1. state government is saying in black and white that it has done > nothing to comply the hon'ble supreme court order > 2. State information commission is directing me to to go to the > competent forum and disposing my case off > 3. Hon,ble Supreme court of india is dismissing my I.A. to file > contempt and directing me to take appropriate proceedings, in > accordance with law, on the basis of the judgment of this Court > reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1. > > What course of action should I take or which door should I knock at > to ensure compliance of the hon'ble supreme court order reported in > (2006) 4 SCC 1 in uttar pradesh. > > Thanks and regards > > Urvashi sharma > 10 , maal avenue > lucknow - 226001 > uttar pradesh - india > ph. No. 0522 - 3232403 >
