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

2022 Supreme(AP) 882

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
BATTU DEVANAND, J.
In Re - Petitioner
Versus
Gopal Krishna Dwivedi - Respondent
Contempt Case No. 1209 of 2021
Decided On : 31-03-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Respondent: C. Sumon.

Willful disobedience of a court order amounts to contempt of court and is punishable under the provisions of the Contempt Court Act, 1971.

Headnote:

CONTEMPT OF COURT - WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE - IMPLEMENTATION OF COURT ORDER - CONSTRUCTION OF VILLAGE SECRETARIAT IN SCHOOL PREMISES - INTERIM ORDER RESTRAINING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES - RESPONDENTS' FAILURE TO COMPLY - INITIATION OF CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS - RESPONDENTS' AFFIDAVITS - COURT'S ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS - RESPONDENTS FOUND GUILTY OF CONTEMPT - SENTENCED TO SIMPLE IMPRISONMENT AND FINE - RESPONDENTS' APOLOGY AND UNDERTAKING TO DO SOCIAL WORK - PUNISHMENT REMITTED - CONTEMPT CASE CLOSED.

Fact of the Case:

The case arose from a suo-moto contempt proceeding initiated by the High Court against the Respondents for their willful disobedience in implementing an interim order restraining construction activities in school premises. The interim order was passed in a writ petition filed by parents of students studying in a Mandal Praja Parishad Primary School, challenging the construction of a Village Secretariat in the school premises.

Finding of the Court:

The Court found that the Respondents, despite being aware of the interim order, failed to take any steps to implement it till the initiation of suo-moto contempt proceedings. The Court also noted that even after filing action taken reports by the Respondents, several writ petitions were filed complaining of constructions unconnected to school activity in school premises.

Issues: 1. Whether the Respondents willfully disobeyed the interim order restraining construction activities in school premises? 2. Whether the Respondents are guilty of contempt of court? 3. What punishment should be imposed on the Respondents?

Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the Respondents' failure to implement the interim order, despite being aware of it, amounted to willful disobedience and contempt of court. The Court considered the Respondents' age and the interest of their families, and in view of the COVID-19 pandemic, it remitted the punishment on the condition that the Respondents undertake to do social work by visiting Social Welfare, S.T. Welfare, and B.C. Welfare Hostels for boys and girls in the Districts assigned to each contemnor in any one Sunday in every month for a total of 12 months and spend some time with the students/wards of the said hostels to motivate them and arrange lunch or dinner (a sumptuous meal) by spending their personal money.

Final Decision: The Court found the Respondents guilty of contempt of court and sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment for two (02) weeks each and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) each. However, the Court remitted the punishment on the condition that the Respondents undertake to do social work by visiting Social Welfare, S.T. Welfare, and B.C. Welfare Hostels for boys and girls in the Districts assigned to each contemnor in any one Sunday in every month for a total of 12 months and spend some time with the students/wards of the said hostels to motivate them and arrange lunch or dinner (a sumptuous meal) by spending their personal money.

ORDER :

This is a suo-moto contempt case initiated by this Court against the Respondents herein for their willful disobedience in implementing the order, dated 11.06.2020 in I.A.No.1 of 2020 in W.P.No.9883 of 2020.

2. The background for initiating the contempt case is that the parents of the students studying in a Mandal Praja Parishad Primary School in Thiruvolu Village, Cheedikada Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, filed W.P.No.9883 of 2020, against the construction of Village Secretariat in the school premises.

3. The grievance of the petitioners in the writ petition is that by constructing the Village Secretariat in the school premises, the very atmosphere of primary school will be spoiled on account of movement of so many people every day to the school and it will hamper the healthy atmosphere of the school.

4. This Court considering the importance of the issue involved in the writ petition, as it is having lager interest which effects the interest of the students studying the Government School/Local Body Schools in the entire State of Andhra Pradesh in achieving essential levels of learnings and for improvement in the quality of education which is guaranteed under Article 21 and 21-A of the Constitution of India, passed the following interim order:

    (1) The Respondents are directed not to undertake any activity of construction in the school premises of Mandal Praja Parishad Primary School in Thiruvolu Village, Cheedikada Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, pending further orders.

(2) The Respondent Nos.1, 2, 10, 11, 12 and 13 are directed to ensure not to take any construction activity or which effects the healthy atmosphere of the school in the premises of the schools being run by State Government/Local Bodies in the State of Andhra Pradesh, pending further orders.

5. While granting the interim order, the writ petition is adjourned for four weeks to enable the Respondents to file counter-affidavits.

6. On 12.07.2021 the W.P.No.9883 of 2020 is listed along with W.P.Nos.12531 of 2021 and 23443 of 2020, which were filed complaining that the Respondents are taking construction activity in the school premises, which are unconnected to the schools and the students. This Court noticed that even after lapse of one year, the Respondents did not choose to file their counter-affidavits, except Respondent Nos.5 and 8 in W.P.No.9883 of 2020.

7. After considering the grievance of the petitioners in W.P.Nos.12531 of 2021 and 23443 of 2020, the Court came to a conclusion that if the Respondents implemented the orders of the Court, dated 11.06.2020, in I.A.No.1 of 2020 in W.P.No.9883 of 2020, there is no necessity to file present writ petitions.

8. Under those circumstances, the Court came to an opinion that the Respondents herein willfully violated the order, dated 11.06.2020 of this Court in W.P.No.9883 of 2020 and accordingly, directed the Registry to initiate contempt proceedings against the Officers, who have been working as Respondent Nos.1, 2, 10, 11, 12 and 13 therein from 11.06.2020 to 12.07.2021 and register a contempt case against the concerned Officers and issue notices in Form-I. In this background, the present contempt case is registered.

9. The Respondents filed their Affidavits.

10. Heard learned Advocate General and the respective counsels appearing for the respondents. Perused the entire material available on record.

11. The 1st Respondent/Principal Secretary to Government, Panchayat Raj & Rural Development, filed Counter Affidavit contending that in order to implement the orders passed by this Court on 11.06.2020, he issued Memo, dated 20.07.2020, instructing the 2nd respondent to take appropriate action. Thereafter, 2nd respondent addressed a Letter, dated 28.07.2020 vide Lr.No.751/CPR&RD/S/2019 to the District Collector, Visakhapatnam and another Memo, dated 09.11.2020 to Chief Executive Officer, ZPP, Visakhapatnam, for taking neces

      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 Back to top