IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR
Bashir Ahmad Kirmani, J.
Mushtaq Ahmad Khateeb - Appellant
Versus
Suman Lata Baghat & Ors. - Respondent
Contempt Petition No. 229/2004
Decided On : 03 August, 2005
Contempt of Court - Violation of Court Orders - Contempt Proceedings - Jammu and Kashmir Drug Control - Government Order No. 123-HME of 2004 - SWP No. 343/2004 - SWP No. 382/2004 - LPA No. 37/2004 - Review Petition No. 137/2004 - Violation of Court Orders - Non-compliance with Court Directions
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner alleges that the respondents failed to comply with court orders to revert Nazir Ahmad Wani to his original position and make a regular appointment for the post of Deputy Drug Controller within four months. The respondents allegedly delayed compliance, allowing Wani to continue unlawfully in the post, and proposed his promotion despite being ineligible. The petitioner sought initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents for willfully flouting court orders.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the respondents willfully delayed and derailed the necessary follow-up action on the administrative side in accordance with court orders. The court expressed concern over the systemic erosion and the credibility of civil administration, emphasizing the need for compliance with binding court orders. The court also highlighted the suspicious patronage of higher-ups in allowing Wani's unauthorized continuation in the post and his proposed promotion despite being ineligible.
Issues: The issues involved the alleged willful non-compliance with court orders by the respondents, the unauthorized continuation of Wani in the post of Deputy Drug Controller, and the proposed promotion of Wani despite being ineligible.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of compliance with court orders and the need for an effective mechanism to monitor and assure compliance of binding court orders. The court also highlighted that even for stop gap arrangements, the prescribed eligibility criteria cannot be jumped over in derogation of the norms governing appointments/promotions.
Final Decision: The court issued notices to the respondents, Commissioner/Secretary GAD, and Nazir Ahmad Wani to explain their conduct and show cause as to why they should not be proceeded against for contempt of court. The court also directed the return of official files to the AAG and communicated the order to the Advocate General and Chief Secretary of the State.
2. One Nazir Ahmad Wani Assistant Drug Controller, Kashmir was adjusted as Deputy Drug
Controller on officiating promotion under Government Order No. 123-HME of 2004 dated 12.2.2004. This was challenged by petitioner on the ground of seniority and better suitability vide Service writ petition No. 383/2004. Simultaneous thereto the said Nazir Ahmad Wani too had filed the writ petition being SWP No. 343 of 2004, seeking continuation on the post of Deputy Drug
Controller and charge allowance etc. Both the writ petitions were decided by common judgment passed by a bench of this court (Honble Mr.Justice Nisar Ahmad Kakru,) on 6.7.2004, whereunder the officiating appointment of Shri Nazir Ahmad Wani aforesaid was quashed, and the Government asked to fill up the post in accordance with rules with liberty to make stop gap arrangement if required. Thus petitioners writ petition 382/2004 was allowed, whereas that
of Nazir Ahmad Wani was dismissed quashing his officiating promotion as Deputy Drug Controller.
3. The said judgment was appealed against by said Nazir Ahmad Wani through Letters Patent Appeal before a Division Bench of this court which was disposed of on 3. 8. 2004 with a direction to fill up the post of Deputy Drug Controller as aforesaid under rules within a period of four months the time fixed according to the statement made by Government counsel in consultations with the administrative department. The judgment of the appellate bench was again sought to be reopened by appellant through the medium of review under petition No. 137 of 2004, which was disposed of by the concerned bench on 2.9.2004. with clarification, that if pending regular appointment some sort of stop gap arrangement would be required, the same be made from amongst eligible persons in accordance with rules governing the matter; and thus ended the chain of litigation. It would be appropriate to mention that all orders passed in the writ petitions, LPA and the review petition were in knowledge of the respondents.
4. It is alleged that after conclusion of litigation as aforesaid, the respondent/contemnors were persistently persuaded by the petitioner to comply with orders of the court and revert back the above said Nazir Ahmad Wani to make room for fulfillment of the post of Deputy Drug Controller on regular basis within the stipulated period of four months and if necessary, make stop gap arrangement from amongst eligible officers, pursuant whereto the respondent No. 3 Shri Lokesh Jha, the then Commissioner Secretary to Government Health and Medical Education Department is stated to have submitted the matter for compliance of court directions more than once- first, at the time of disposal of writ petitions by single bench, secondly, after dismissal of the LPA, and lastly after disposal of the review petition, but despite that nothing happened, because respondent/ contemnors 2 and 1 did not act with due promptitude. They sat over the files for almost a year and thereby created a situation in which the court orders simply withered away by efflux of time. This is alleged to have been done by both of them willfully, to help the above said Nazir Ahmad Wani continue unlawfully on the post of Deputy Drug Controller, and was a conscious act on their part to defeat the process of law. Grievance of the petitioner against respondent No. 3 the then Commissioner Secretary, is,that he should have acted in furtherance of the process of law by implementing the court orders aforesaid, despite in action of the ministers, which he failed to do and thereby contributed to the process of flouting the aforesaid court orders. In their written statement of facts, respondents have maintained that they have already complied with the court directions.
5. Perusal of the court orders above mentioned reveals that the judgment dat
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.