@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
Shabihul Hasnain, J.@mdashHeard Dr. Neeraj Chaubey the petitioner-applicant in person. Dr. Chaubey is an eminent scientist and has been
appearing before this Court off and on. It hurts the conscience of the court to see the scientist of the country running from pillar to post to get his
salary for his and his family''s survival. A country which needs the services of such scientists for its development can ill-afford to see the brain of the
country wasting its energies at the corridors of the court. There appears to be long history of litigation relating to his service conditions. This Court
does not want to rake up the issues which have come to an end through the compliance report filed by the opposite party No. 1. It has been
informed that the opposite party No. 1 has been a student of the petitioner-applicant. It is such a tragedy that a teacher had to file cases of
contempt against his own student who occupies the chair of Director of the institute where the applicant has been teaching.
2. Without making any further observations the court finds in para No. 4 of the affidavit, that salary for the month of March, April, May, June, July,
August and December, 2011 have been deposited in the account of the petitioner in Punjab National Bank on 16.1.2012. The paragraph further
says that Branch Manager, Kamla Nehru Institute of Technology, Sultanpur has informed petitioner No. 1 about the payment.
3. Dr. Neeraj Kumar has further stated that he has been harassed too much and some cost should be imposed on opposite parties for making him
run to save his family from starvation and to save his house from being auctioned.
4. The court requested Dr. Neeraj Chaubey to put an end to litigation and go back to work. Litigation amongst teachers is not to be encouraged.
If the intellectuals of this country cannot solve their problems and cannot control their egos, the achievements will be dwarfed. The people of this
country need the scientists/teachers for the larger good of the people. Dr. Neeraj Chaubey was magnanimous enough to accept the advice of the
court and let bye gones be bye gones.
5. The court expects the opposite party No. 1 not to do anything further which is against the orders of the court. He has lost up to Hon''ble
Supreme Court. The court also advised Dr. Neeraj Chaubey to give due respect and regard to the Director.
6. The court expects both the scientists to behave in a cordial manner. Show due respect to each other and work in harmony and tandem for the
betterment of the country.
7. In view of the affidavit of opposite party No. 1 the court feels that nothing remains to be decided by it. The petition is finally disposed of.
The notices are discharged.
However, if there is any complaint about the compliance of the court''s order the petitioner shall be at liberty to move an application in the petition.