1. Contempt proceeding — Unconditional apology tendered and accepted — Further direction to department for action challenged. (Para 1 , 2 )
Back
Next 
2014 Supreme(SC) 1283
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
P. Sathasivam, CJI., Ranjan Gogoi, M.Y. Eqbal, JJ.
R. Subramaniam - Petitioner
Versus
Murugappa Gounder and others - Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 1793 of 2014
Decided On : 31-01-2014
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :R. Balasubramaniam, Senior Advocate, Sumit Kumar, Ajay Amitrag, Amit Sharma, Advocates.
For the Appellant :R. Balasubramaniam, Senior Advocate, Sumit Kumar, Ajay Amitrag, Amit Sharma, Advocates.
When a court accepts an unconditional apology in contempt proceedings, it is neither permissible nor warranted to simultaneously direct the concerned department to initiate further administrative action against the apologizing party.
Headnote:(A) Contempt Proceedings - Acceptance of unconditional apology - Direction for administrative action - Once an unconditional apology tendered by the contemnors is accepted by the court, further direction to the concerned department for initiating appropriate action against them is neither permissible nor warranted. (Para 4)
Facts of the case:
In a contempt petition, the single judge accepted the unconditional apologies tendered by the parties through affidavits. However, the court also forwarded a copy of the order to the administrative authority for initiating appropriate action against them. This order was subsequently confirmed and the appeal against it was dismissed by the division bench.
Findings of Court:
Since the parties had tendered an unconditional apology and the same had been accepted by the court, the direction to the concerned department for further appropriate action was found to be neither permissible nor warranted.
Issues: Whether a court can direct administrative action against a party in a contempt petition after having accepted their unconditional apology.
Ratio Decidendi: The acceptance of an unconditional apology in the form of an affidavit in contempt proceedings precludes the court from issuing further directions to the concerned department for initiating administrative action against the contemnor.
Result: Appeal allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Appellant contended that direction for departmental action after accepting apology was impermissible. (Para 2 )
3. Once unconditional apology is accepted, further direction for departmental action is neither permissible nor warranted. (Para 4 )
4. After acceptance of unconditional apology in contempt proceedings, no further disciplinary or departmental action can be directed. (Para 4 )
5. Appeal allowed; direction for departmental action set aside. (Para 4 )
6. After acceptance of unconditional apology in contempt proceedings, can the court direct departmental action?
No, further direction for action is neither permissible nor warranted once the apology is accepted. (Para 4 )
ORDER :
1. Though the respondents duly served with notice but are not represented by counsel.
Heard learned senior counsel for the appellant.
Leave granted.
2. The only grievance of the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant is that though the learned Single Judge accepted the apology tendered by the appellant and Respondent No. 2 herein, forwarded a copy of the order passed in the contempt petition to the Principal Secretary & Commissioner of Land Administration, Chepauk, Chennai, for initiating appropriate action.
3. We have gone through the order dated 29.06.2012 passed by the learned Single Judge in Contempt Petition No. 30 of 2012. In Para 20 and 21 the learned Single Judge clearly accepted the ‘unconditional apology' tendered by Respondent Nos. 1 and 3 therein. In spite of acceptance directed the authority to take action against them. When the said order was challenged in the Contempt Appeal No. 3 of 2012, the Division Bench by its impugned order confirmed the same and dismissed the appeal.
4. In the light of the fact that the persons concerned including the appellant herein have made unconditional apology in the form of an affidavit and having been accepted by the learned Single Judge, we are of the view that further direction to the Department concerned for appropriate action neither permissible nor is warranted. Accordingly, the said direction as found in para 20 of the order of the learned Single Judge and the confirmation order of Division Bench are set aside.
The appeal is allowed on the above terms. No cost.
Appeal allowed.
