Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
HARISH TANDON, MURAHARI SRI RAMAN
Rakesh Kumar Sahoo – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. delay in authorities' compliance. (Para 1) |
| 2. court's duty to ensure compliance. (Para 2) |
| 3. clarification of lease period calculation. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 4. role of authorities in compliance. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 5. implementation is independent of litigant's conduct. (Para 7) |
| 6. order for immediate implementation. (Para 8) |
| 7. writ petition disposed without costs. (Para 9) |
JUDGMENT :
HARISH TANDON, CJ.
1. The dormant and lethargic attitude of the authorities in taking a prompt and immediate decision in compliance of the direction passed by this Court in an earlier round of litigation, is eminently present and manifested in the instant case.
2. Though the petitioner has not complained off the violation of the order dated 26th October, 2021 passed in WP(C) No.17047 of 2021 by filing a contempt petition, yet the Court cannot shut its eyes in the event the Court finds that there has been a flagrant violation of the said order undermining the sanctity and majesty of the Court and its order. We would have proceeded to initiate a suo motu contempt proceeding after noticing the aforesaid facts, but we find that the petitioner has approached by filing a separate writ petition seeking implementa
Judicial orders must be respected and implemented promptly by authorities, without dependency on petitioner actions, to uphold court dignity.
The authority cannot undo an issued Letter of Intent without jurisdiction and adequate notice, maintaining adherence to principles of natural justice.
The court emphasized the principle that when a statute provides for a thing to be done in a particular manner, it must be done in that manner or not at all, and any other methods are barred.
Mining authorities cannot refuse lease extensions based on policy when statutory provisions support such extension, especially if the delay was not the lessee’s fault.
Willful disobedience requires a deliberate and intentional act, and genuine inability or actions not done with a bad purpose do not amount to willful disobedience.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
