S.N.PHUKAN, K.T.THOMAS
Suresh Chandra Poddar – Appellant
Versus
Dhani Ram – Respondent
ORDER
This is an instance of how a Tribunal vested with the powers to punish for Contempt of Court became over sensitive in using such powers. Time and again this Court has cautioned as to when and in what circumstances Contempt of Court jurisdiction is to be exercised. Such a power is not intended to be exercised as a matter of course. Courts should not feel unduly touchy when they are told that the orders have not been implemented forthwith. If the court is told that the direction or the order of the Court has been complied with subsequently, albeit after receipt of notice of contempt, we expect the courts to show judicial grace and magnanimity in dealing with the action for contempt.
2. The Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi, has now convicted the Director of Education, Government of NCT of Delhi under Section 17 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 read with Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and sentenced him to a fine of Rs. 2000/- as per the impugned order. The Bench held that the appellant is guilty of contempt, not because he did not implement the order passed by the Tribunal but because there was delay in implementing the orde
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.