Back
1991 Supreme(Cal) 282
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
K. M. YUSUF, J.
HINDUSTHAN LEVER SRAMIK KARMACHARI CONGRESS
VERSUS
ASHISH CHAKRABORTY AND OTHERS, CONTEMNORS.
C.R. No.3134 of 1989,
Decided On : 3 -6 -1991
In contempt proceedings, the Court has the power to issue consequential directions for enforcing its order, including directions for holding an election as per the Court's original order.
Headnote:
CONTEMPT - Contempt of Court - Wilful disobedience and deliberate violation of Court's order - Failure to hold election of Executive Committee of Trade Union as per Court's direction - Interference with course of justice - Intimidation, coercion and assault of Special Officers appointed by Court - Court's power to issue consequential directions for enforcing its order in contempt proceedings.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a Trade Union, filed a contempt application against the alleged contemners for wilfully disobeying and deliberately violating the Court's order dated 21st July, 1989, by not allowing the Special Officers to hold and conduct the election of the Executive Committee of the Trade Union as per the program drawn by the Special Officers. The alleged contemners also interfered with the course of justice by intimidating, coercing, and assaulting the Special Officers appointed by the Court to frustrate the election of the Union.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the alleged contemners had wilfully disobeyed and deliberately violated the Court's order dated 21st July, 1989, by not allowing the Special Officers to hold and conduct the election of the Executive Committee of the Trade Union as per the program drawn by the Special Officers. The Court also found that the alleged contemners had interfered with the course of justice by intimidating, coercing, and assaulting the Special Officers appointed by the Court to frustrate the election of the Union.
Issues: 1. Whether the Court's order dated 21st July, 1989, had merged with the subsequent orders passed by another Judge, rendering the contempt application infructuous? 2. Whether the Court had the power to issue consequential directions for enforcing its order in contempt proceedings?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that its order dated 21st July, 1989, had not merged with the subsequent orders passed by another Judge and that the contempt application was not infructuous. The Court reasoned that its order had been tested in the Supreme Court and stood final and absolute, and that the Court was duty-bound to give proper and appropriate relief to the petitioner in the contempt proceeding for holding the election of the Union in keeping with the judgment under reference. 2. The Court held that it had the power to issue consequential directions for enforcing its order in contempt proceedings. The Court relied on two Division Bench decisions of the Calcutta High Court and two decisions of the Supreme Court, which held that contempt proceedings were a form of execution and that the Court had the right to issue necessary and further consequential directions for enforcing its order.
Final Decision: The Court directed the Additional District Judge, 5th Court, Alipore, to make all arrangements for holding the election of the Executive Committee of the Trade Union in the compound on the vacant space of the District Judges' Court, Alipore, on any Sunday or holding according to the convenience under the direct supervision of a senior Assistant District Judge. The Court also directed the District Judge concerned to implement this order and render all possible assistance to the 5th Additional District Judge, including the compound availability for holding the election. The Court further directed the Deputy Commissioner of Police and the Officer-in-Charge of the Police Station of the area concerned to render all possible assistance and police help as required by the Additional District Judge, 5th Court, Alipore, or the Assistant District Judge to be appointed for the purpose of supervision or the Special Officers and shall maintain peace and order on the spot.
K.M.Yusuf, J. : - This is an application for contempt for wilful disobedience and deliberate violation of my order dated 21st July, 1989 passed in C.O. No. 1939 of 1989 by the alleged contemners by not allowing the Special Officers to hold and conduct the election of the Executive Committee of the Hindusthan Lever Sramik Karmachari Congress as per programme drawn by the two Special Officers in accordance with the direction given to the learned Additional District Judge, 5th Court, Alipore, and also by interfering with the course of justice by intimidating and coercing and also assaulting the two Special Officers appointed as per my order to frustrate the election of the Union.
2. In my Judgment of 21st July, 1989 I, inter alia, directed the learned Additional District Judge, 5th Court, Alipore, to appoint two Special Officers to conduct the election of the Executive Committee of the Hindusthan Lever Sramik Karmachari Congress in accordance with the constitution of the said Trade Union within a period of two months from the date of their appointment. The learned Judge was given liberty to give necessary direction to the Special Officers and to hold the election through secret ballot. I further directed that the Special Officers would be at liberty to take suitable police help for holding and completing the election by declaring the result and the concerned police authorities of the area including the Deputy Commissioner of Police and the Officer-in-Charge of the Police Station were directed to render all possible police assistance to the Special Officers for the smooth conduct of the election. Liberty was also given to the Special Officers to seek direction from the learned Additional District Judge whenever they would so require. I further directed that till the election took place there would be status quo as of 21st July, 1989 with regard to the affairs of the Union vis-a-vis the petitioner. Mr. Ashish Chakraborty moved the Supreme Court against my Judgment and the S.L.P. (Civil) No. 10156 of 1989 was disallowed on 27th September, 1989.
3. In paragraph 27 of the judgment I observed that the newly elected Executive Committee did not appear to be functioning smoothly and if functioning at all for limited purposes, it was functioning with the active aid and assistance of the Company (i.e. M/s. Hindusthan Lever Limited) and in paragraph 29 I made clear that "the best course" would be to direct the Hindusthan Lever Sramik Karmachari Congress to hold the fresh election of the Executive Committee of the Union under the supervision of two Special Officers to be appointed by the learned Additional District Judge, 5th Court, Alipore, so that the wrangle among the two factions led by Tewary and Ashish must come to an end once for all and the Company must work smoothly and peacefully, with the new Executive Committee in accordance with law", AIR 1990 NOC 38 : 1989 (2) Cri LJ 140 : Cal LT 1989 (2) HC 283.
4. In the contempt application some allegations have been made against the Police Personnel and the faction of the Union led by Mr. Ashish Chakraborty. Pursuant to my order the learned Additional District Judge appointed Mr. Uttam Basu and Mr. Pijush Kanti Nag, the two learned Advocates, as Special Officers to conduct the election of the Executive Committee of the Union. On 21st September, 1989 the Special Officers issued notice for election giving details regarding the Election Schedule and on 25th September, 1989, primary voters, list was published inviting objections within 48 hours. On 26th September, 1989 Mr. Ashish Chakraborty filed a petition praying for certain direction upon the Special Officers and the learned Additional District Judge passed necessary order thereon. The said Mr. Chakraborty, the alleged contemner No. 1 moved a writ application before Shymal Kumar Sen, J. on 19th October, 1989. As the election date was fixed by the Special Officers on 28th October, 1989 his Lordship was pleased to direct that th
