Willful disobedience of an interim order passed by a court constitutes a civil contempt of court under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

ORDER

1. This contempt case is filed under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, by the petitioners, for willful disobedience of the order passed by the High Court in W.P.No.8598 of 2014 dated 21.03.2014.

2. The petitioners filed W.P.No.8598 of 2014 to issue writ of mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in taking steps to dispossess the petitioners from the land in Sy.No.29/1 of Thunglam Village, Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam District as illegal, arbitrary and it is in violation of Principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from the land in Sy.No.29/1 of Thunglam Village, Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam District without following due procedure under law.

3. Upon hearing argument of both the counsel, the High Court issued the following direction during pendency of writ petition:

'Notice before admission returnable in four weeks.

The learned Standing Counsel appearing for Rashtriya Ispath Nigam Limited submits that the land in Survey No.29/1 is away by 10 meters from the boundary wall and this land was never acquired for the purpose of Steel Plant and there is no intention to acquire also.

There shall be interim direction to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from the land to an extent of Ac.5-42 cents in Survey No.29/1, situated at Thunglam Village, Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam District.

Post after four (4) weeks.'

4. After the above interim order is passed in W.P.No.8598 of 2014 dated 21.03.2014, the respondents intentionally came to the petitioners land with J.C.B. Machines on 13.06.2021 at about 5.45 a.m and started demolishing the compound wall forcibly though they had knowledge that the interim order was passed on 21.03.2014. The respondents intentionally made an attempt to demolish the buildings of these petitioners and demolished part of the compound wall in violation of the orders passed by this Court. To establish demolition, the petitioners placed on record positive photographs taken at the time of demolition of compound wall and interference with possession and enjoyment, despite the direction issued by this Court. The photographs would clinchingly establish the intentional and deliberate violation of the orders passed by the High Court. The news item published in the newspaper is also placed on record to establish that the demolition of part of the building, despite the interim order of the High Court in W.P.No.8598 of 2014 dated 21.03.2014.

5. It is contended that, prior to demolition, during subsistence of the interim order in W.P.No.8598 of 2014 dated 21.03.2014, no notice was issued to these petitioners proposing to take action for demolition of the compound wall and no intimation was also given to these petitioners. The respondents have gone to the extent of directing the electricity authorities to disconnect the power supply to the premises and accordingly, the authorities disconnected the power supply, on 13.06.2021 without any intimation. It is contended that, Respondent Nos.6 & 7 personally supervised the demolition and in the said demolition, valuable goods stored in the premises were lost. Respondent Nos. 6 & 7 proclaimed that, it is a government property without any notice or determination by following procedure established under law in high-handed manner at the instance of land grabbers initiated the above action of demolition in violation of the orders passed by the High Court. After demolishing the compound wall, Respondent Nos. 6 & 7 insisted the petitioners to sell the property to the persons indicated by them, which itself is sufficient to establish that the respondents intentionally at the instance of third parties demolished the compound wall of these petitioners in violation of the interim order in W.P.No.8598 of 2014 dated 21.03.2014. Thus, the respondents/ contemnors violated the order of this Court intentionally and deliberately without any respect of the order of this Court and requested to take appr