JUDGMENT It is a petition for drawing contempt proceedings. Contempt Petition No. 239/98 was entertained and notices were issued. In response to the notices, alleged contemners i.e. D.P. Dubey, Collector Rewa, S.D. Dwivedi, SDO Sirmour, district Rewa and R.K. Pandey Chief Executive Officer are present. Their presence may be noted. The alleged contemners have tendered their apology and have also filed reply. Learned counsel representing them submitted that the applicant has committed fraud and has not approached this Court with clean hands inasmuch a~ this Court in Writ Petition No. 4632/97 on 21.11.97 passed the following order and this order though it was an exparte order, but it was not communicated as it was passed by this Court : "Shri Govind Patel for the petitioner. Heard The petition is admitted for hearing. Issue notice to the respondents on payment of process fee in three days. In the meanwhile, if the petitioner still holds the charge of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Paharkha, Block Gangev Tah. Sirmour, Distt. Rewa, he shall not be forced to hand over charge and the operation of the order passed by the Registrar dt. 10.7.97 Annexure p-1 shall remain stayed until further orders. C.C. as per rules." .. .. It is further submitted that no certified copy of the order of this Court was produced, but a photostat copy was produced, copy of which is annexed with the reply as Annex. R-3. The order in the Annex. R-3 dated 27.11.97 is as extracted below : "Shri Govind Patel for the petitioner. Heard. The petition is admitted for hearing. Issue notice to the respondents on payment of process fee in three days. In the meanwhile, the petitioner still holds the charge of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Paharkha, Block Gangev, Tah. Sirmour, Distt. Rewa, he shall not be forced to hand over charge and the operation of the order passed by the Registrar dt. 10.7.97 Annex. P-1 shall remain stayed until further orders. C.C. as per rules." .. .. After comparing two orders it is apparent that word "if in the paragraph begins with the sentence "In the meanwhile", has been omitted. This fact is borne out from the record. It is well established principle of law that one who flees justice is not entitled to seek justice. In the present case a fraud is played. .. After comparing two orders it is apparent that word "if in the paragraph begins with the sentence "In the meanwhile", has been omitted. This fact is borne out from the record. It is well established principle of law that one who flees justice is not entitled to seek justice. In the present case a fraud is played. Learned counsel for the applicant argued the matter but he did not realise the fact regarding his obligation to the Court. He is expected to be fair with the Courts. He tried to justify the order and also submitted that what has been filed with the reply was not the order which the applicant has produced. He has not stated that he filed a certified copy of the order of this Court. He only tried to justify his own conduct. A lawyer has dual obligations; one is towards his client and the other is towards the Courts and these two obligations can be discharged only by adopting element of fairness. If the argument of the learned counsel for the applicant is accepted that he supplied the copy of the order which contained the word "if" then there is no contempt. The lawyer is practising since 1986 and a period over ten years is over. In such long span of time he was expected to have developed himself in a proper direction knowing the professional ethics and also the Rules of Conduct and Etiquette framed by the Bar Council of India under the Advocates Act, 1961. However, I am not inclined to take any action against the lawyer though he was not fair in making his submission before the Court. The Officers were made to run to this Court for no justification and their time was wasted apart from public money. Such action should not get encouragement. The contempt petition being sans substance deserves to be dismissed and in such circumstances the applicant is liable to be saddled with the cost. The petition is dismissed with cost Rs. 2,000/- (Rs. Two Thousand) which shall be paid within 30 days from today, failing which the same shall be realised in the manner as the fine is imposed under the Code of Criminal Procedure.