2008 Supreme(SC) 2056
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.K. MATHUR, ALTAMAS KABIR, JJ.
Steel Authority of India Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Daby Lal Mahto and Ors. - Respondents
Civil Appeal No.1774 of 2008
Decided on : 05-03-2008
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Sunil Kumar Jain, Adv. Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Adv. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi, Adv. Mr. Ajay Kumar Bhatia, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s):Mr. Manish Kumar Saran, Adv. Mr. Nirmal Kumar Ambastha, Adv. Mr. Sharvan Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ram Niwas, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Malhotra, Advocate.
For the Intervenor :Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Advocate.
Headnote:
Constitution of India – Appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in Contempt Case (C) in respect of displaced persons belonging to category – By the impugned judgment and order, the Division Bench of the High Court has issued Contempt Notice for non-compliance of the orders passed by the Patna High Court, Ranchi Bench (as it then was) –Held, Court also record our displeasure that every now and then under the contempt notice the officials are required to attend courts which hampers the working of the administration – Court have already expressed this view in the case – Hence the practice of calling the officials in contempt proceedings should be minimised and only in exceptional cases the concerned officials may be called – Appeal allowed.
ORDER :
Leave granted.
2. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order dated 3rd/10th January, 2007 passed by the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in Contempt Case (C) Nos. 20, 34, 39 and 178 of 2006 in respect of displaced persons belonging to category No. 2. By the impugned judgment and order, the Division Bench of the High Court has issued Contempt Notice for non-compliance of the orders dated 7th April, 1998 and 1st August, 2000 passed by the Patna High Court, Ranchi Bench (as it then was).
3. The brief facts which are necessary for disposal of this appeal are that Bokaro Steel Plant, a national project of the Government of India, was commissioned on land acquired from the various land holders. For acquisition of their lands, the land holders were not only paid compensation but in addition to that, an understanding was reached between the Union Government, the State Government and the Company that apart from compensation, one person from each displaced family would be given employment in the steel plant. This evoked a spate of petitions and various orders were passed from time to time in view of the assurance which was given in the minutes of the Understanding dated 25th January, 1964. In view of the Understanding, a list was prepared of all persons whose lands were acquired along with buildings and structures and those whose lands had been acquired which did not have any building and structure thereon. The original list prepared in the year 1972 consisted of 6019 displaced families and against that more than 16,000 (approx.) persons have already been given employment.
4. Thereafter, on 5.9.1991, 150 vacancies arose in Khalasi post for displaced persons and a scheme was framed which was approved by the Jharkhand High Court in LPA Nos. 161-162 of 1996 for filling up the vacancies advertised on 5.9.1991. A direction was given by the Division Bench in its order dated 7th April, 1998, which reads as under:
"Both these appeals are accordingly disposed of in terms of the aforementioned scheme proposed by the Steel Authority with the following direction/observations:
(i) The Steel Authority shall prepare a list containing names of displaced persons in accordance with clause (1) of the proposed scheme within two months of the receipt of the certified copy of this judgment. The list so prepared shall be sent to the Director, Project Land and Rehabilitation, for verification, who shall get the bonafide of the status and claim of such persons verified and submit the report in connection therewith to the Steel Authority within three months from the date of receipt of the request for verification. The Steel Authority will thereafter hold interview for selection of suitable candidates and prepare a panel containing the names of selected displaced persons within two months.
(ii) The persons whose names are included in the panel will be placed in two categories according to the criteria already laid down and referred to hereinbefore. The persons in category no. (i) will be given employment first. Thereafter, those who are included in category no. (ii) will be considered for employment."
5. Thus in terms of the direction given by the High Court, two lists of displaced persons were prepared. Category (i) list consisted of persons whose lands along with buildings were acquired and category (ii) list consisted of persons whose lands alone were acquired. As per the direction of the High Court, employment was to be given first to persons of category (i) and those whose names were included in category (ii) were to be considered for employment. Then some directions were also given by the High Court on 1.8.2000. Pursuant to the direction of the High Court, Director, Project Land & Rehabilitation (for short 'DPLR') prepared a list and sent the names of 286 persons and on verification it was found that 79 persons were not eligible for consideration in category(i) and on 8.4.2002, the DPLR confirmed the list of 207 persons in cat