JAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY v. HARI NATH SHARMA — 1994 DIGILAW 795 (RAJ)

Judgment V. K. SINGHAL, J. ( 1 ) AN application for contempt has been moved by the Jaipur Development Authority in respect of interfering in the final verdict passed by this Court on 12/05/1994, which according to the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, has been passed knowingly and wilfully in order to shake the faith of the public and also tantamounts to interference to the judicial proceedings and is an act of wilful disobedience. ( 2 ) THE facts of the case are that the land acquisition proceedings were taken by the Land Acquisition Officer by issuing notification u/s. 4 on 13/05/1960 and declaration under Section 6 on 3-5-1961 and the award was passed on 9-1-1964. The compensation was accepted in 1970. A writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India after 22 years in the year 1992. The said writ petition was dismissed on 15-3-1994 on the ground of inaccurate, untrue and misleading facts being stated and the petitioner had not come with clean hands and was guilty of suppression of facts. An appeal was filed against the said judgment before the Division Bench which was decided on 12-5-1994 and it was held in the said appeal that the principles of estoppel, res judicata and construction res judicata are fully applicable. The dispute about possession of land was not considered bona fide. The decision of learned Single Judge was approved and beside the delay even on merit of the case, the appellant was held not entitled to succeed. It was also observed :"that the land having been validly acquired in pursuance of the notifications which are duly published in the State Government Gazettes and Award having been passed by the Land Acquisition Officer pursuant thereto, it is not open to the appellant to raise such pleas on flimsy and untenable grounds. "the special appeal thus was dismissed not only in respect of delay but it was observed that even on merits of the case the appellant is not entitled to succeed. The Land Acquisition Officer was one of the parties before this Court. ( 3 ) IT appears that the file was put up before the said Land Acquisition Officer on 23-5-1994 and the Land Acquisition Officer has mentioned that the file was sent to the Advocate of Jaipur Development Authority and has been received today. The Land Acquisition Officer was one of the parties before this Court. ( 3 ) IT appears that the file was put up before the said Land Acquisition Officer on 23-5-1994 and the Land Acquisition Officer has mentioned that the file was sent to the Advocate of Jaipur Development Authority and has been received today. The application was submitted by Babulal for cancellation of acquisition proceedings in pursuance of the notification dated 7-1-1971 issued u/s. 4 of the Act, was considered in the presence of his Advocate Babulal. It was directed that a copy of the application be given to Shri Madan Lal Surolia, Advocate for JDA to file the reply and the case was listed on 25-5-1994. On 25-5-1994, the contemner passed the order showing the presence of Shri Prem Surana, Advocate the operative part of which is as under :- From the above order passed by the contemner it is evident that the acquisition proceedings were dropped contrary to the finding recorded by this Court. ( 4 ) FROM the copy of the application lying in the file, it appears that the said copy was not delivered to JDA, an affidavit has been submitted by the contemner that the copy was delivered to the counsel for Jaipur Development Authority Shri Surolia. Shri Surolia has filed an affidavit that he was neither present nor any copy was delivered to him and his presence has wrongly been recorded in the order-sheet dated 23-5-1994. Mr. Tiwari, appearing on behalf of the contemner, was given opportunity to cross-examine him but he has declined to avail the said opportunity and, therefore, it was considered that the affidavit which has been submitted by Shri Surolia, is uncontroverted. ( 5 ) ON the application moved by the Jaipur Development Authority, cognizance was taken by this Court and notice for contempt of the Court, was issued to the contemner. The contemner presented himself in person and offered his unconditional apology. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as of the contemner have been heard on the point as to whether it is a fit case for grant of apology. In this regard the file of the Land Acquisition Officer, which was produced, have been perused. The contemner presented himself in person and offered his unconditional apology. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as of the contemner have been heard on the point as to whether it is a fit case for grant of apology. In this regard the file of the Land Acquisition Officer, which was produced, have been perused. From the perusal of the said file it is evident that the entire action was completed within a period of three days and that too without giving a notice to the Jaipur Development Authority. Any order, which is passed by any authority, contrary to the judgment given by this Court, could only he considered non est for which separate action could be taken. No authority in the State has the power to sit over the judgment or to pass an order contrary to the order, passed by this Court which has binding effect so that the faith of the public is shaken in the judicial system and it could be considered by any person that in spite of a judgment being given by a competent court, the authorities below have the power to over-ride the said judgment. From the order, which has been passed, it is clear that it is a case of gross contempt and the contemner has tried to exercise powers which have never been vested in him. The affidavit, which has now been filed, also speaks the manner in which the proceedings were taken by the contemner and a false plea was taken that the notice was given to the Jaipur Development Authority. The action for filing the false affidavit will be taken separately under Section 340 of Cr. P. C. in view of the affidavit submitted by Mr. Surolia, which remained uncontroverted. Alleged deacquisition in other cases by the contemner, cannot be examined in this judgment. ( 6 ) THE matter with regard to acceptance of apology has been dealt with by this Court in Sukh Raj v. Hemraj, AIR 1967 Raj 203 wherein it has been held :-"an unconditional or unreserved apology in a case of a minor or technical contempt may be accepted to have the effect of purging the same. But the same could not be legitimately predicated of serious or gross contempts. An apology is not a weapon of defence forged to purge the guilt under all circumstances. But the same could not be legitimately predicated of serious or gross contempts. An apology is not a weapon of defence forged to purge the guilt under all circumstances. Nor can it be allowed to operate as a universal panacea. Whether an apology should be accepted or not as pruging the contempt in any particular case must depend on the circumstances of each case and the chief of these factors must inevitably be the nature or character of the contempt made. Therefore, where the contempt is of a particularly gross character, any apology offered by the contemner should not be accepted as having purged the same. "in the case of Advocate General, State of Bihar v. M/s. Madhya Pradesh Khair Industries, AIR 1980 SC 946 , the Apex Court has observed as under"while we are conscious that every abuse of the process of the Court may not necessarily amount to contempt of Court, abuse of the process of the Court calculated to hamper the due course of a Judicial proceeding or the orderly administration of justice we must say, is a Contempt of Court. It may be that certain minor abuses of the process of the Court may be suitably dealt with as between the parties, by striking out pleadings under the provisions of Order 6, Rule 16 or in some other manner. But, on the other hand, it may be necessary to punish as a contempt, a course of conduct which abuses and makes a mockery of the judicial process and which thus extends it pernicious influence beyond the parties to the action and affects the interest of the public in the administration of justice. The public have an interest, an abiding and a real interest, and a vital stake in the effective and orderly administration of justice, because, unless justice is so administered there is the-peril of all rights and liberties perishing. The Court has the duty of protecting the interest of the public in the due administration of justice and so, it is entrusted with the power to commit for Contempt of Court, not in order to protect the dignity of the Court against insult or injury as the expression "contempt of Court" may seem to suggest, but, to protect and to vindicate the right of the public that the administration of justice shall not be prevented, prejudiced, obstructed or interfered with. "it is a mode of vindicating the majesty of law, in its active manifestation against obstruction and outrage" Per Frank Furter, J. in Offut v. U. S. (1954) 348 US 11. "the law should not be seen to sit by limply, while those who defy it go free, and those who seek its protection lose hope". Per Judge, Cutis-Raleigh quoted in Jennison v. Baker (1972) 1 All ER 997 at p. 1006. " ( 7 ) WE need not cite the various authorities which has been produced before us by both sides because so far as the conduct is concerned, petitioner has himself placed no defence in respect of the action which has been taken by him. The contemner after service of notice was permitted to inspect the record and beside the opportunity of cross-examination was given, opportunity for putting forth his explanation for the charges levelled against him. The apology definitely can be considered so far as the quantum of punishment which has to be given as it minimises the gravity, but does not absolve the contemner of his guilt. Looking to the facts and circumstances, we are of the definite opinion that the contemner has committed the gross contempt of the Court and is liable for strict action, as even in this quasi-judicial capacity he has taken such an action, which cannot be protected by any plea as he has not only flouted the orders of this Court, but has passed the order which was contrary to the judgment given by this Court on 12-5-94. The contemner was one of the respondents in Appeal before the Division Bench and in the order passed by him has referred the judgments alleged to have been brought to his notice and, therefore, was fully conscious and aware of the decision given by this Court. ( 8 ) THE order dated 25-5-94, passed by the contemner, amounts to interference with due course of justice and is in flagrant violation of the judgment given by this Court and cannot be considered in good faith and was an attempt to show that an officer can undermine the dignity of Court at his whim. The tendency on the part of administrative officers to undermine the authority of the Courts, is to be depricated and this judgment should be a lesson to others. The tendency on the part of administrative officers to undermine the authority of the Courts, is to be depricated and this judgment should be a lesson to others. ( 9 ) THE conduct is so re-reprehensible as to warrant condemnation by imposition of sentence of imprisonment and the contemner is liable to be punished to undergo simple imprisonment to uphold majesty of law and dignity of Court and the prayer that sentence of fine alone may be given, is not acceptable as that would not be adequate looking to the conduct of the contemner and the favour which has been given by him to the party in dropping acquisition proceedings contrary to the decision of this Court. ( 10 ) LOOKING to the facts and circumstances, the contemner is held guilty of contempt and as such, we direct that the contemner be sent for jail for 15 days. The prayer for suspension of this sentence, which has been moved, is dismissed. The Additional Registrar is directed to take appropriate steps for sending the contemner right from here to the jail and to see that appropriate instructions are issued to jail authorities so that if any medical facility is sought by him, is provided. Order accordingly.