Court No. - 32 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 648 of 2004 Petitioner :- Hari Raj Kishore Respondent :- Shail Kumari & Others Petitioner Counsel :- Bhanu Pratap Singh Respondent Counsel :- Yogesh Agarwal Hon'ble R.K. Agrawal,J.
Hon’ble Abhinava Upadhya,J.
The present contempt appeal has been filed against the
order of the learned Single Judge dated 28.4.2004 by which
the contempt petition filed by Shail Kumari and others was
disposed of by awarding cost of Rs. 20,000/- (Rs. Twenty
Thousand Only) on the respondents.
We have heard Sri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned counsel for
the appellant.
Brief facts are that there were seven Basic Schools with 62
teaching and non-teaching staff run by Churk Cement
Factory and Dala Cement Factory. These were the
Government Companies incorporated under Section 617 of
the Companies Act, 1956 (in short the Act) which went in
liquidation and, therefore, the salary of the teachers and
non-teaching staff was not being paid. The employees of the
College filed a writ petition with the aforesaid grievance and
this Court vide order dated 6.6.2002 directed the State
authorities to consider for taking over the institutions under
the Basic Education Board and also to provide financial aid
in public interest. The said consideration by the Government
was directed to be done within a period of four weeks. The
Government in turn, in its usual manner, took more than four
weeks. In fact it took about two years to pass an order being
order dated 12.2.2004 holding that there is no provision for
taking over such institution. The respondents then filed the
contempt petition on the ground that the order of the Court
has not been complied with in its true letter and spirit as the
desire of the Court was that the State Government should
take over the institution and run the same as it runs other
recognized Basic Schools. through the Parishad. The
learned Single Judge while considering the pleas raised by
the parties came to the view that the contempt proceeding
cannot proceed any further as the order of the Court has
now been complied with by passing an order dated
12.2.2004 by which the governmental authorities after
considering the issue declined to take over those institutions.
According to the learned Single Judge the said order dated
12.2.2004 was in compliance of the High Court’s order dated
6.2.2002 and has also held that in case the applicants
therein are aggrieved by the order, they are at liberty to
challenge it before the appropriate forum and thus, refused
to draw contempt proceedings against the appellants.
However, in view of the fact that instead of considering the
matter within four weeks as directed the authorities took two
years, therefore, cost of Rs. 20,000/- was imposed.
Sri Singh, learned counsel for the appellant then submitted
that once the learned Single Judge has found that the order
of the Court has been complied with, he ought not to have
imposed cost of Rs. 20,000/-. He further submits that if the
Court found the respondents’ guilty of contempt, it could
have framed charges and then pronounced its verdict but in
the present case having found that the order of the Court
has been complied with, the learned Single Judge should
not have imposed cost.
We have considered the submissions made by the learned
counsel and have gone through the order of the learned
Single Judge and have perused the ground of appeal and
annexures annexed along with the memo of appeal. We are
all too familiar with the functioning of the Government where
there is a tendency of passing the buck and pushing the file
from one table to another and no single individual can be
held to be accountable for the working and, therefore, some
times inordinate delay are caused without any particular
reason or motive.
In this view of the matter, we respectfully disagree with the
learned Single Judge in imposing cost of Rs. 20,000/- and,
therefore, the order imposing cost is set-aside.
In terms of what has been stated above, the appeal is,
therefore, allowed.
Order Date :- 29.7.2010
SKM