Allahabad High Court
Dr. Ram Pratap Singh vs Prashant Sharma, District Magistrate, ... on 18 February, 2020
Author: Abdul Moin
Bench: Abdul Moin
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 22 Case :- CONTEMPT No. - 1738 of 2019 Applicant :- Dr. Ram Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- Prashant Sharma, District Magistrate, Distt. Amethi Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Pratap Singh,Surendra Pratap Singh Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.
In pursuance of the order of this Court dated 4.2.2020, an affidavit of compliance has been filed today in the Court which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel.
The facts of the case, which has led to filing of the aforesaid affidavit, have been summed up by this Court in its order dated 4.2.2020, which for the sake of convenience is reproduced below:-
"Heard.
Compliance affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Sri Vinayak Saxena, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, submits that in compliance of the judgment and order passed by the writ Court dated 11.01.2019 whereby the District Magistrate, Amethi, was required to take appropriate decision in accordance with law on the complaint made by the petitioner within a period of six weeks, the order has been passed on 24.12.2019, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure-1 to the affidavit of compliance. It is thus contended that as the order passed by the writ Court has been complied with and an order has been passed in pursuance thereof by the District Magistrate, Amethi, consequently the present contempt petition may be dismissed.
However, on the other hand, Sri S.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the order passed by the writ Court was to be complied with by the District Magistrate, Amethi, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. It is contended that the certified copy of the order of the writ Court was sent through registered post on 14.02.2019, a copy of which is Annexure-4 to the contempt petition. It is also contended that the respondent was having knowledge of the order passed by the writ Court as would be apparent from perusal of the letter dated 28.02.2019, a copy of which is Annexure-5 to the contempt petition, wherein it has been noted that the writ Court through its aforesaid order had directed for passing an order within a period of six weeks. It is contended that despite the respondent having knowledge of the said order, he has taken almost ten months for passing of the order on the basis of directions issued by the writ Court and thus the District Magistrate, Amethi, is in contempt of the order passed by the writ Court.
Having heard learned counsel for the contesting parties and having perused the records including the annexures which have been referred to above, it is apparent that the District Magistrate, Amethi, was having knowledge of the order passed by the writ Court yet had only proceeded to pass an order in purported compliance of the directions issued by the writ Court after issue of notice of contempt. Thus, even though the order has been complied with yet it is apparent that the same has been complied with belatedly after issuance of the contempt notice to the District Magistrate, Amethi, i.e. under threat of contempt.
In this view of the matter, let the District Magistrate, Amethi, file a show cause within a period of two weeks as to why exemplary cost be not imposed against him for not having complied with the order passed by the writ Court within the time prescribed as had been granted by the writ Court and without even applying for extension of time for compliance of the said order.
List this case on 18.02.2020.
It is provided that in case the reply to the show cause is not filed then the District Magistrate, Amethi, shall appear in person before this Court on the date fixed."
In the compliance affidavit filed today, it has been contended that the respondent/contemner took charge as District Magistrate, Amethi on 15.11.2019 and thereafter order has been passed on 24.12.2019. The delay caused in passing of the said order has been made attributable to the Enquiry Officer namely Sri Naveen Kumar Srivastava, Assistant Commissioner and Assistant Registrar, Cooperative, Amethi and Sri Devendra Singh, District Panchayat Raj Officer, Amethi as per the details given in paragraph 12 of the compliance affidavit. It is also contended that a request has been made to the State Government to initiate departmental/disciplinary proceedings against the aforesaid officers.
In this view of the matter more particularly when the District Magistrate, Amethi is not responsible for the delay caused he having taken over charge on 15.11.2019 and action indicated in paragraph 12 of the compliance affidavit being taken against the guilty officers, it is expected that the action would be taken in pursuance of the averments contained in paragraph 12 of the compliance affidavit against the guilty officials.
Taking into consideration the aforesaid, the contempt petition is dismissed and the notices are discharged. It would be open for the petitioner to challenge the order dated 24.12.2019 before the appropriate Court in appropriate proceedings.
Order Date :- 18.2.2020 Rakesh