ORDER B.M. Lal, J. l. By this application under section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act, the petitioner seeks that by an appropriate order the non-petitioners be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of Contempt of Court Act (hereinafter referred to as the Contempt Act). 2. The petitioner, Western Coalfields Limited (hereinafter referred to as the WCL), a company registered under the Companies Act, and wholly owned by the Union of India, carries on a business of production, despatch and sale of coal and other incidental operations, of which Jamuna Colliery is one of the units. 3. The grievances of the petitioner, WCL are that the order passed by this Court on 2-8-1982 in Civil Revision No 1107/1982 whereby the non-petitioners were directed to release the Bus of the petitioner has, not been respected and as such the non-petitioners have committed contempt of Court within the meaning of Contempt Act. 4. These facts are not disputed that Jamuna Colliery is located within the territorial jurisdiction of Notified Area Committee, Kotma, district Shahdol against whom certain dues under the M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) have been found due amounting to Rs.39,919/-for which a Demand Notice by the non-petitioners was issued. But it appears that the same was not complied with. Therefore, the Notified Area Committee, Kotma recording to the provisions of the Act attached the petitioner's School bus bearing registration No. M.P. A. 9778. 5. The petitioner against this attachment unsuccessfully preferred an appeal under section 139 and 172 of the Act and thereafter vide Civil Revision No. 1107 of 1982 before this Court. 6. This Court on 2-8-1982 passed the order directing the present non-petitioners to release the bus on Supratnama to the petitioner. 7. The petitioner alleges that despite the order of this Court and the same having been produced before the non-petitioners No.2 and 1 instead of complying the order refused to release the bus and in this manner the order of this Court was disobeyed flagrantly which amounts to contempt of Court and as such the non-petitioners made themselves liable to be dealt with in accordance with the Contempt Act. 8. 8. The non-petitioners in their reply while denying the allegation at the very outset submitted that they never intended to disobey the order of this Court On the other hand, it is stated that as soon as the order of this Court was received by them on 18-8-1982 they immediately served a notice on 18-8-1982 to Shri D. Kumar, Senior Personnel Officer, Jamuna Colliery and the standing counsel for WCL Shri P. Nair, Jabalpur for taking delivery of the bus on Supratnama and in consequence thereof actually the bus was delivered on 21-8-1982. 9. The non-petitioners further stated that, it is D. Kumar who misbehaved with the officers of the Notified Area Committee, Kotma i.e. the present non-petitioners, by abusing them in filthy manners for which under compelling circumstances the non-petitioners had to report the matter to the Police Station House Officer, Kotma and the District Official Heads and as such for any delay in releasing the bus, Shri D. Kumar is responsible. This statement of the non-petitioners is supported by an affidavit sworn in by Rajendra Prasad Mishra, Chief Municipal Officer, Notified Area Committee, Kotma. 10. Under these circumstances, the point in issue is that whether the non-petitioners have violated the order of this Court deliberately, thereby making themselves liable to be dealt with under the Contempt Act. 11. The reply of the non-petitioners which is supported by an affidavit completely falsifies the allegation made against them by the petitioner and as such we do not find any substance in it that the non-petitioners had any occasion to disregard the order of this Court in the manner stated by the petitioner. On the other band from the perusal of the averments of the petition and its reply and the documents filed by the respective parties, we filed that it is D. Kumar, who being a responsible officer of WCL used abusive language and misbehaved with the officers of the Notified Area Committee, Kotma and created the scene at the cost of public undertaking, 12. Western Coalfields Limited is owned by the Union of India and its employees are governed by rules and regulations framed by the WCL which prescribe the code of conduct. This petition is not disputed. Therefore, it is expected that the person holding the charge of Senior Personnel Officer of a Colliery should behave and deal matters in a proper and decent manner. 13. This petition is not disputed. Therefore, it is expected that the person holding the charge of Senior Personnel Officer of a Colliery should behave and deal matters in a proper and decent manner. 13. It appears that Shri D. Kumar, just to satisfy his ego and to wreck his vengence on account of report lodged against him by the non-petitioners has persuaded the WCL to file this contempt petition and in this way company's fund which is nothing but public money is misused without any rhyme or reason. 14. From the discussions aforesaid we do not find that the non-petitioners are guilty of committing contempt of Court and, therefore, we discharge the rule nisi issued by this Court on 11-8-1982 15 Before closing the case we would like to clarify that, where funds of Public Undertaking or even that of Government which is nothing but public money is misused in frivolous and fallacious matters to satisfy the personal ego of the officer concerned, in such cases, notwithstanding the fact, that the officers are immuned for their acts done in good faith while performing their public duty, but in the garb of such immunity they will not be allowed to misuse their power and any action if found lacking good faith resulting in not only negligence but wilful negligence which amounts to statutory negligence allowing the aggrieved party to maintain action against the officer concerned who has not performed his duly in bonafide manner, then expense of 'Such litigation incurred by the public undertaking or the Government as the case may be, recovered from the salary of the Officer concerned making him personally liable for such act done by him in the pretext of performing public duty, after making due enquiry in the matter for fixing the liability for the expenses so incurred. 16. Therefore, under the facts find circumstances of the case, we direct that the management of the Public Undertaking i.e. Western Coalfields Limited shall conduct an enquiry to fix the liability of the expenses incurred in this frivolous litigation after issuing notice to Shri D. Kumar, Senior Personnel Officer, Jamuna Colliery or wherever might he be posted. 17. From the discussions aforesaid with the observations made in the proceeding paragraphs No. 15 and 16, this petition is dismissed with cost. Counsel's fee Rs.300/- if certified.