SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(SC) 2037

A. S. ANAND, K. G. BALAKRISHNAN, R. C. LAHOTI
T. Sudhakar Prasad – Appellant
Versus
Govt. of A. P. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

R.C. Lahoti, J.-Administrative Tribunals set up under the provisions of Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, do they or do they not have power to punish for their contempt? Whether after the decision of this court in L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.1, Section 17 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (hereinafter, the Act for short) does not survive and has been rendered unconstitutional or otiose? These questions of far-reaching implications to the administration of justice through tribunals arise for consideration in these appeals.

2. A cursory view of factual backdrop. An application (Contempt Application No. 562/1996 in O.A. No. 35574/1991) invoking the contempt jurisdiction of Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal under Section 17 of the Act and seeking initiation of proceedings against the Principal Secretary, Irrigation and CAD Department was filed complaining of willful disobedience by the latter of an order passed by the Tribunal in favour of the applicant. The Tribunal initiated the proceedings. The State of A.P. and the Principal Secretary filed a writ petition (CWP No. 34841/1997) in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh laying challenge to the jurisdict





















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top