1994 Supreme(Pat) 423
PATNA HIGH COURT
B.L.Yadav and Aftab Alam JJ.
Mohd.Manwarul Haque
Versus
State Of Bihar
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No. 449 of 1994 ;
Decided On : DECEMBER 22, 1994
Wilful disobedience of a court order, as defined under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971, requires intentional, deliberate, or purposeful disobedience.
Headnote:
CONTEMPT OF COURT - WILFUL DISOBEDIENCE - SECTION 2(B) OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT, 1971 - INTERPRETATION - MEANING OF WILFUL DISOBEDIENCE - INTENTIONAL, DELIBERATE OR PURPOSEFUL DISOBEDIENCE CONSTITUTES CONTEMPT.
Fact of the Case:
The applicants, who were appointed as Dalpatis in their respective Gram Panchayats, were selected for the post of Panchayat Sewak after completing the required training. However, the District Magistrate (Respondent No. 2) cancelled their posting without any notice or information. The applicants filed a writ petition in the High Court, which directed the District Magistrate to decide the matter of posting and salary of the petitioners within six weeks. The District Magistrate failed to comply with the order within the specified time.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the disobedience of the order by the District Magistrate was not wilful, as he required the original copy of the writ petitions to remove certain doubts in his mind and was making a further enquiry to decide the matter as directed by the court. Therefore, civil contempt as defined under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 was not made out.
Issues: Whether the non-compliance of the court's order by the District Magistrate amounted to wilful disobedience constituting civil contempt under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the term "wilful disobedience" under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971, as intentional, deliberate, or purposeful disobedience. The court held that mere disobedience of an order does not constitute contempt unless it is wilful. The court also considered the explanation provided by the District Magistrate for the delay in complying with the order and found it to be reasonable.
Final Decision: The court discharged the notice issued to the District Magistrate as no wilful disobedience was proved. However, the court directed the District Magistrate to dispose of the matter by a reasoned order within six weeks from the date of receiving a certified copy of the order.
B.L.Yadav, J.
1. This is an application under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Sec. 12 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 (compendiously the Act). The prayer in the application is that Shri Rajani Ranjan Prasad, District Magistrate, Katihar (Respondent No. 2) and Shri Akshaya Kant Mishra, District Panchayat Officer, Katihar (Respondent No. 3) be punished for having deliberately and wilfully disobeyed the order of this Court dated 10th December, 1993 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 7513 of 1993.
2. The portrayal of the essential facts are that the applicants were appointed as Dalpatis in their respective Gram Panchayats by the Executive Committee of the Gram Panchayat and their appointments were approved by the District Panchayat Officer, Katihar by exercising his power under Rule 4(1) of the Bihar Panchayat Village Welfare Force Rules, 1949. The applicants were sent for training in Central Training Institute at Ranchi and completed the same and were awarded certificates. The State Government (Respondent No. 1) decided by order dated 24.6.1989 to appoint Dalpatis, on the post of Panchayat Sewak provided a Dalpati was trained matriculate and was within the age limit of 40 years and 43 years for reserved categories. For this purpose a gradation list was prepared with a view to decide seniority of the Dalpatis in the district. The District Panchayat Officer also gave his approval. The District Selection Committee of the Panchayat Sewak was constituted in view of the direction contained in Memo No. 33 dated 13th March, 1992 and it held meeting on 20.10.1992 and selected the applicants and some other candidates to the post of Panchayat Sewak. The candidates selected by the said Committee for the appointment to the post of Panchayat Sewak were already appointed after following the procedure prescribed including the roaster. The District Panchayat Officer was directed by order dated 29.12.1992 to send the applicants in the Panchayat Sewak Institute, Jasidih-Deoghar in pursuance of the meeting of the District Selection Committee of the Panchayat Sewak held on 20.10.1992. In view of this direction and order the applicants joined the Panchayat Sewak Institute, Jasidih-Deoghar on 5.1.1993 and continued to work there satisfactorily till 3.4.1993. An examination was held in the Training Institute and the applicants were successful in that examination and a certificate was awarded to the applicants by the Principal of the Institute on 30.4.1993.
3. Thereafter the applicants joined before the Panchayat Office on 6.4.1993 and submitted their certificates of training but were not posted anywhere and they were not posted anywhere and they were awaiting for their postings. The District Magistrate (Respondent No. 2) vide Memo No. 445 dated 14.6.1993 appointed the applicants and two others on the post of Panchayat Sewak in different blocks in the District Panchayat Office, Katihar and they continued to serve there to the full satisfaction of authorities concerned and they (except applicant No.l) were paid salary for the month of June, 1993. All of a sudden the Respondent No. 2 passed an order exercising the power of superintendence without any notice or information to the applicants that their posting be cancelled. The order was later on modified that only Ram Nath Paswan and Mansoor Alam who were similarly situate, would continue on their posts and the applicants would not continue on the post of Panchayat Sewak. The District Panchayat Officer by his order dated 23.8.93 directed the recovery of the amount of salary paid to the applicants.
4. The applicants thereafter preferred C.W.J.C. No. 7513 of 1993 before this Court, which was disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court, by order dated 10.12.1993 (Annexure-1 to this application). It was directed that the District Magistrate(Respondent No. 2 ) would decide and pass an appropriate order, within six weeks, in the matter of posting of the applicants and for the payment of their