Important Point
Initiation of contempt proceedings is not a substitute for execution proceedings though at times that purpose may also be achieved.

Headnote:Contempt of Court Act, 1971-Civil Contempt-Disobedience of courts order-It must be shown there has been wilful disobedience -Even negligencl and carelessness can amount to disbedience-Initiation of contempt procedings is not a substitute for execetion proceedings-A person who complains breach of courts order must allege deliberate or contumacious disobedience of court’s order.
       Held : For holding the respondents to have committed contempt, civil contempt at that, it has to be shown that there has been wilful disobedience of the judgment or order of the court. Power to punish for contempt is to be resorted to when there is clear violation of the court’s order. Since notice of contempt and punishment for contempt is of far reashcing consequence, these powers should be invoked only when a clear case of wilful disobedience of the court’s order has been made out. Whether disobedience is wilful in a particular case depends on the facts and circumstances of that case. Judicial orders are to be properly understood and complied. Even negligence and carelessness can amount to disobedience particularly when attention of the person is drawn to the court’s orders and its implication. Disobedience of court’s order strikes at the very root of rule of law on which our system of governance is based. Power to punish for contempt is necessary for the maintenance of effective legal system. It is exercised to prevent perversion of the course of justice. (Para 9)
       Jurisdiction to punish for contempt exists to provide ultimate sanction against the person who refuses to comply with the order of the person who refuses to comply with the order of the court or disregards the order continuously. Initiation of contempt proceedings is not a substitute for execution proceedings though at times that purpose may also be achieved. No person can defy court’s order. Wilful would exclude casual, accidental banafide or unintentional acts or genuine inability to comply with the terms of the order. A petitioner who complains breach of court’s order must allege deliberate or contumacious disobedience of the court’s order. (Para 10 & 11)

Judgement Key Points

Please provide the full legal document (insert content into ...) and specify your query or task (e.g., "Summarize key obligations" or "Extract clauses on termination"). I'll analyze it and output key points with precise references like (!) (!) .

Judgment

D.P. Wadhwa, J.-Leave granted.

2. On refusal of the Patna High Court to intiate procedings for contempt against the respondents, the appellants have come to this court.

3. The appellants were working as Assistant Teachers in different elementary schools in Godda district in the State of Bihar. They are in the category of untrained teachers. Their services were terminated. Some of the teachers similarly placed filed writ petitions in the High Court against their termination and the matter ultimately reached this Court. It is not necessary to go into the various stages of the litigation except to note that this Court by order dated November 30, 1992 in Birendra Kumar & Ors. v. State of Bihar1 directed as under :

“We, therefore, direct once again that if there are vacancies and if there are not trained teachers available the untrained teachers who were employed prior to the newe rule came into operation, would be reinstated in service if after subjecting them to the selection process they are found suitable. If there are no vacancies, they would be empanelled according to their seniority and would be appointed according to their seniority in the vacancies arising in future. Unless this panel is exhausted, no new appointment of untrained teachers will be made from outside. It is understood that those eligible for being so appointed will be the ones who were appointed before the new rule came into operation.

While making the appointments of those who were so in service prior to the date of appointment, the State Government will relax the age limit, if necessary.

We are informed that the appellants involved in the present case were paid salaries till 30th June, 1991. We also understand from Mr. B.B. Singh, learned advocate appearing for the State that all the vancancies have been filled in till 1.1.1992. If there were vacancies and yet the appellants were not appointed in the said vacancies such of the appellants who were eligible to be appointed any yet were not appointed in spite of the salaries from 1st July, 1992 till their appointment. However, if there were no vacancies and all the appellants or some of them have to be appointed in the new vacancies which may be available hereafter, they will not be entitled to the salaries from 1st July, entitled to the salaries from 1st July, 1992, till the date of their appointment. However, when they are appointed the period of break in service not exceeding one year will be taken into consideration for benefits other than salary.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.”

4. Appellants and some other teachers like them got similar orders from the High Court in their respective writ petitions. The main order passed by the High Court is dated January 20, 1993 in CWJC No. 7000/92. In this judgment the High Court noticed the appointments made in some districts and the number of existing vacancies. State had contended that onoy one regular vacancy existed when according to the petitioners, there were not less than 2,000 vacancies. Counter affidavit filed by the State did not indicate if all the 2,000 vacancies had been filled up. With the consent of the counsel for the petitioners and the Advocate General that these peetitions may also be disposed of in the light of the aforementioned direction of the Supreme Court the High Court directed it accordingly. High Court said : “We may however, direct the State to fill up posts in terms of the aforemertioned direction of the Supreme Court with utmost expedition and preferably within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” Similar orders were passed in other writ petitions filed by untrained teachers as well.

5. Under the orders of the Supreme Court and those of the High Court which followed, the State Government was to fill up the existing vacancies, if any, by appointing the appellants and other untrained teachers who were eligible to be appointed against those vacancies and in case vacancies did

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1999 Supreme(SC) 926

Important PointInitiation of contempt proceedings is not a substitute for execution proceedings though at times that purpose may also be achieved.

Cases Referred (1)

Important Point
Initiation of contempt proceedings is not a substitute for execution proceedings though at times that purpose may also be achieved.