Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 549 (CAL)

Judicial Employees Association v. Y. M. Pandey

2013-08-06

JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA

body2013
JUDGMENT Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J. This contempt petition has been filed alleging violation of the order passed by this Court on 2nd April, 2012 in W.P. No.1013 of 2012, by the alleged contemnors. By the said order, the Andaman and Nicobar Administration was directed to implement the recommendations of the Shetty Commission in its true sprit and letter, as a whole, so far as the court staff of subordinate judiciary of these islands is concerned, positively within a period of four months from the date of communication of this order. It was also made clear therein that in the event any cooperation and/or assistance and/or help including the financial assistance is needed from the Central Government for implementation of the recommendations of Shetty Commission, as a whole, the local administration will approach the Central Government, in that event, the Central Government will render all necessary help and/or cooperation and/or assistance including the financial assistance to the local administration of Andaman and Nicobar Islands, so that the Shetty Commission report can be implemented, as a whole, within the time limit fixed above. Now, the petitioners have alleged that the contemnors have violated the said order of this Court by not taking any step for implementation of the said order of this Court till date, though the time limit, fixed by this Court for implementation of Shetty Commission report, has long expired. Affidavits have been exchanged between the parties in connection with the contempt proceedings. Mr.S.K.Mandal, learned advocate appearing for the A & N Administration/contemnors submits that already 21 posts have been created for subordinate judiciary under the judgeship of District Judge, A & N Islands. He further submits that all financial benefits have already been granted to the existing staff of the subordinate judiciary under the judgeship of District Judge, A & N Islands, as per the recommendations of the Shetty Commission. He further submits that since the Administration was not informed about the exact requirement of the subordinate judiciary with regard to creation of additional posts for smooth functioning of the subordinate judiciary at A & N Islands, the Administration could not take any effective step for creation of additional posts in implementation of the recommendations of Shetty Commission. He further submits that since the Administration was not informed about the exact requirement of the subordinate judiciary with regard to creation of additional posts for smooth functioning of the subordinate judiciary at A & N Islands, the Administration could not take any effective step for creation of additional posts in implementation of the recommendations of Shetty Commission. In this connection, a report was sought for from the District Judge, A & N Islands, as to the exact requirement of staff for the entire subordinate judiciary under his judgeship and in pursuance of such direction passed by this Court, a comprehensive report has been submitted by the learned District Judge, A & N Islands, indicating therein the exact requirement of staff in the subordinate judiciary under his judgeship in A & N Islands. The said report has already been circulated amongst the learned advocates appearing for the alleged contemnors. By referring to the said report, Mr.Mandal, learned advocate submits that the requirement of the staff in the subordinate judiciary which was mentioned by the learned District Judge in his report does not tally with the recommendations given by the Shetty Commission. According to him, staff requirement in the Subordinate Judiciary, has been unnecessarily exaggerated by the learned District Judge in his report. The learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that creation of some of the posts which has been recommended by the learned District Judge in his report, does not find support from the Shetty Commission report. Under such circumstances, this Court feels that the Administration cannot be directed to create additional posts in the light of the report submitted by the learned District Judge by accepting the same in its entirety. However, the requirement for creation of some additional posts for the existing sanctioned Courts in terms of the report submitted by the learned District Judge has not been denied by Mr.Mandal, learned advocate. In the report, the learned District Judge, mentioned that several correspondences were exchanged between the learned District Judge and the Administration with regard to the creation of additional posts for the subordinate judiciary in the light of the recommendations of Shetty Commission, as per the directions passed by this Court earlier but the administration has not taken any effective step for creation of such additional posts as per the suggestion of the learned District Judge. However, creation of 21 additional posts as pointed out by Mr.Mandal, learned advocate remains undisputed by the parties. Be that as it may, since a comprehensive report has now been submitted by the learned District Judge, A & N Islands, this Court feels that the official respondents at A & N Islands now should not feel any difficulty in implementing the Shetty Commission report in the light of the order passed by this Court earlier on 2nd April, 2012. However, since the controversy with regard to the actual requirement of the subordinate judiciary cannot be set at rest by this Court presently without further materials being brought before this Court, this Court instead of keeping this contempt proceeding pending before this Court for adjudication of such disputes, feels it proper to dispose of this contempt petition by directing the A & N Administration to create requisite number of additional posts for the subordinate judiciary in consultation with the learned District Judge at A & N Islands in the light of the recommendations made by Shetty Commission. Accordingly, this contempt is disposed of, with the direction upon the A & N Administration to create requisite number of additional posts for the subordinate judiciary in consultation with the learned District Judge at A & N Islands in the light of the recommendations made by the Shetty Commission, in its report. While doing so the authority concerned should not be unmindful of the requirement of the additional courts which are functioning in these islands in terms of the direction passed by the High Court. Such exercise should be completed within four month from the date of communication of this order and identification of the additional posts for the subordinate judiciary to be created in terms of the Shetty Commission report should be made by the Administration in consultation with the learned District Judge at A & N Islands within one month from the date of communication of this order to them. Before parting with, this Court wants to keep it on record that Mr.Das, learned advocate appearing for the Union of India submits before this Court that the creation of such additional posts in the subordinate judiciary is exclusively left to the jurisdiction of the A & N Islands Administration by his clients, and the Union of India will not stand in the way of creation of such posts in the light of recommendations given by Shetty Commission in its report. As such, this Court directs the Union of India to render all cooperation and assistance including the financial assistance to the A & N Administration for the additional posts to be created by the A & N Administration for the subordinate judiciary in these islands in implementation of the Shetty Commission report, within the time limit as fixed above. This contempt application is thus disposed of with this finding that since there is no willful and deliberate violation of the order passed by this Court by any of the alleged contemnors, no rule need be issued against the alleged contemnors in this proceeding. The application for contempt is thus disposed of with the above observations. Let plain photostat copy of this order countersigned by the Assistant Registrar(Court) be given to the learned Advocates of the parties for communication of the order to their respective clients.