Back
2021 Supreme(Mad) 705
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.N. PRAKASH, V. SIVAGNANAM, JJ.
N. Sathyanarayanan, Sub-Collector, Ariyalur, Others - Appellant
Versus
Kalaiselvi & Others - Respondent
Contempt Appeal Nos. 7 of 2019 & 4, 5 & 10 of 2020 & C.M.P. No. 26639 of 2019 and 5145, 5147 & 7552 of 2020
Decided On : 08-03-2021
For the Appellant :Aravind Pandian, Addl. Advocate General Assisted by A.N. Thambidurai, Special Government Pleader, M. Suresh Kumar, Advocate.
For the Respondents:S. Kamadevan, Advocate.
The Court emphasized the need for the exercise of contempt powers in accordance with the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and expressed concern over the Government's decision to lease waterbodies to a private entity.
Headnote:
Contempt - Government Land Encroachment - Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Section 19 - [Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd. v. State Government] - Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Section 19
Fact of the Case:
Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd. sought permission to utilize Government poramboke lands, occupied the lands without permission, and filed a writ petition challenging the order to vacate the land. The writ petition was dismissed, and subsequent appeals were also dismissed. The residents filed a contempt petition alleging non-compliance with the court's order to remove encroachments. During the pendency of the contempt petition, the Government leased waterbodies to Chettinad Cement, leading to the framing of charges against government officials.
Finding of the Court:
The Contempt Appeals were dismissed as not maintainable. The Court expressed anguish over the Government's actions in leasing prime waterbodies to a private entrepreneur.
Issues: Non-compliance with court orders, maintainability of Contempt Appeals, and leasing of waterbodies by the Government.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the mere framing of charges was not a ground for challenge under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, and the High Court's powers to punish for contempt should be exercised in accordance with the Act and Rules. The Court also expressed concern over the Government's decision to lease waterbodies to a private entity.
Final Decision: The Contempt Appeals were dismissed as not maintainable, and connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed. The Court urged the learned Single Judge to proceed with the Contempt Petition without being influenced by the Government's actions.
JUDGMENT :
P.N. PRAKASH, J.
Prayer: Contempt Appeal preferred under Clause 15 of Letter Patent read with Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to keep all further proceedings and hearings in Contempt Petition No.634 of 2019 in abeyance till the Government of Tamil Nadu decides on the representation dated 22.08.2019 made by the appellant pursuant to the liberty granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India to the appellant in its order dated 25.02.2019 in SLP (Civil) Nos.5443 & 5444 of 2019
1. The facts that are necessary to decide these Contempt Appeals are as under:
a. Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd. (for brevity “Chettinad Cement”), a business giant, gave a letter dated 05.05.2009 to the State Government, seeking permission to utilise Government poramboke lands in S.F.No.4/2011 and thereafter, it appears that they were in occupation of the said lands, even without obtaining any permission. This made the Sub Collector, Ariyalur to pass an order dated 10.02.2015, directing the Chettinad Cement to vacate the Government poramboke land in their possession and enjoyment, challenging which, Chettinad Cement filed W.P.No.4779 of 2015. During the pendency of the said Writ Petition, Chettinad Cement was in occupation of the lands, perhaps on account of a stay that was granted by this Court. W.P.No.4779 of 2015 came up for final disposal before a learned Single Judge, who, by order dated 13.08.2018, not only upheld the order dated 10.02.2015 passed by the Sub Collector, Ariyalur, but, also issued the following positive directions :
“23.This being the view taken by this Court, there is no infirmity as such in respect of the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent/The Sub-Collector, Ariyalur, in proceedings dated 10.02.2015 and accordingly, the writ petition is devoid of merits. However, taking note of the internal correspondences between the Government officials and the manner in which the Government lands including the water bodies are systematically allowed to be encroached by the corporates like the petitioner, this Court is inclined to pass the following orders:
(i) The writ petitioner, admittedly, an encroacher of the Government land, has not established even a semblance of right to grant the relief as such sought for in the present writ petition. Accordingly, the claim of the writ petitioner is rejected.
(ii) The respondents 2 and 3 are directed to evict all the encroachments of the “Government Poramboke lands”, “Vari Poramboke lands”, “Pond Poramboke lands” and all other public lands in that locality within a period of Two Weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
(iii) The Superintendent of Police, Ariyalur, is directed to provide necessary Police protection to the respondents 2 and 3 to evict the encroachers from the public lands in all respects.
(iv) The first respondent is directed to order for an enquiry or investigation to be conducted by an I.A.S. level officer in respect of the conduct of the officials of the District Administration and the officials of the Public Works Department in respect of their conduct, negligence, dereliction of duty, corrupt activities, illegalities and to submit a enquiry report within a period of two Months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
(v) On receipt of an Investigation/Enquiry report, the first respondent is directed to initiate all appropriate actions against all the public servants and all other persons concerned under the penal provisions of law and under the Discipline and Appeal Rules.
24. With these directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.
Post this matter “For Reporting Compliance” after two months. Registry is directed to communicate the copy of this order also to the Superintendent of Police, Ariyalur District.”
b. Aggrieved by the said order, Chettinad Cement filed Writ Appeal No. 1960 of 2018 and also filed a fresh Writ Petition
