AIR 2007 SUPREME COURT 3100 ::2007 AIR SCW 5577 ::2007 Lab IC 4133 ::2007 (7) SCC 689 ::(2007) 10 Scale 625 ::(2007) 6 AllMR 403 (SC) ::(2008) 1 ServLJ 387 ::2007 (6) All MR 403 ::(2007) 4 All WC 4028 ::(2008) 1 Mah LJ 546 ::(2007) 4 Lab LN 967 ::(2008) 1 Kant LJ 249 ::(2007) 4 SCT 452 ::2007 (6) ServLR 157 ::(2007) 6 Supreme 97 ::(2007) 58 AllIndCas 120 (SC)

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Karnataka)

Hon'ble Judge(s): C. K. Thakker, D. K. Jain , JJ

Constitution of India , Art.215, Art.16— Karnataka State Civil Services (Regulation of Promotion, Pay and Pension) Act (11 of 1974) , S.4— Direction of Court - Implementation - Seniority of petitioner re-assigned - All consequential benefits directed to be paid - Order of Court becoming final - Plea that such order could not be passed in view of S. 4 - Not tenable. In the instant case, express and unequivocal direction was issued by the Court to grant the writ-petitioner "such other consequential benefits that he might get consequent upon the revision of ranking". It was also observed that such benefits should be paid to him by December 30, 1997 as the writ-petitioner was to retire in February, 1998. The said decision has become final and binding. It is, therefore, not open to the appellant-Board to contend that the respondent is not entitled to such benefits under 1973 Act and hence no such direction could have been issued by the Court.(Para 24) Once a direction is issued by a competent Court, it has to be obeyed and implemented without any reservation. If an order passed by a Court of Law is not complied with or is ignored, there will be an end of Rule of Law. If a party against whom such order is made has grievance, the only remedy available to him is to challenge the order by taking appropriate proceedings known to law. But....