1. Matter adjourned to allow defaulting states to file replies on contempt action. (Para 2 )
Back
Next 
2011 Supreme(SC) 1199
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.H. KAPADIA, CJI., A.K. PATNAIK, SWATANTER KUMAR, JJ.
National Campaign Committee for Central Legislation on Construction Labour - Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and Others - Respondent
IA No. 6 in WP (C) No. 318 of 2000 with Contempt Petitions (C) Nos. 41, 44 and 42 of 2011 in WP (C) No. 318 of 2006 and Contempt Petition (C) No. 43 of 2011
Decided on : 28-11-2011
The court held that defaulting state governments should be given an opportunity to file a reply and explain non-compliance before contempt action is initiated against the concerned officers.
Headnote:(A) Contempt of Court - Defaulting State governments - Opportunity to submit reply before initiation of contempt proceedings - Court may grant an adjournment to enable concerned officers to justify non-compliance. (Paras 1, 2)
Facts of the case:
In a proceeding where multiple states were observed to be in contempt of previous directions, the court noted that almost every state was in default, necessitating further steps in the matter.
Findings of Court:
The court found it necessary to provide an opportunity for the defaulting states to respond before proceeding with contempt actions against the officers concerned.
Issues: Whether contempt action should be immediately initiated against the concerned officers of the defaulting states or if they should be given an opportunity to file a reply.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that in order to provide a fair opportunity to the defaulting states, the matter should be adjourned to allow them to file replies explaining why contempt action should not be taken against the concerned officers.
Result: Matter adjourned to the last week of December, 2011.
Legal Category Hierarchy
- contempt of court (Para 2)
Table of Contents
2. What action does a court take when states are in contempt?
Court may adjourn the matter to give states an opportunity to file replies before taking contempt action. (Para 2 )
ORDER :
S.H. Kapadia, CJI.
Since almost every State is in contempt, we have no option but to take further steps in the matter.
2. However, in order to give opportunity to the States, the matter is being adjourned to the last week of December, 2011, to enable each defaulting State to file its reply as to why contempt action should not be taken against the officers concerned.
