Back
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
K. N. Singh, S. K. Verm, J.
M/S. KALLOO MAL VISHESHWAR PRASAD AND ANOTHER
VERSUS
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF U.P., LUCKNOW AND OTHERS
Criminal Misc. Contempt No. 122 of 1973 in Civil Misc. Writ No. 2772 of 1973,
Decided On : November 5, 1973
CONTEMPT OF COURT - [KEYWORD] - U.P. TEMPORARY ACCOMMODATION REQUISITION ACT, 1974 - [SUBJECT] - Section 3, 4 - [ACT SECTION LIST] - The District Magistrate, Allahabad, Sri Anirudh Pandey, passed a requisition order on 27th April, 1973, for requisitioning a house in the City of Allahabad for a public purpose. The owners of the house filed a writ petition (No. 2772 of 1973) before the Allahabad High Court challenging the validity of the requisition proceedings and claiming relief for the quashing of the notice dated 7th April, 1973. On 27th April, 1973, the High Court issued notice to the respondents in the writ petition and passed an interim order restraining them from proceeding with the requisition proceedings until further orders of the Court. Despite the interim order, the District Magistrate served the requisition order on the owners of the house on 28th April, 1973. The owners filed an amendment application seeking amendment in the writ petition and a stay application seeking relief for the issue of an interim order suspending the operation of the requisition order. The High Court issued notice to the District Magistrate to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt of Court. The District Magistrate and his Reader, Jagdish Chandra, appeared before the High Court and filed their affidavits and contested the notices issued to them. The High Court held that the District Magistrate and his Reader had wilfully disobeyed the interim order of the High Court dated 27th April, 1973, and were guilty of contempt of Court. The High Court imposed a fine of Rs. 500 on Jagdish Chandra and directed that he be detained in civil prison for a week in default of payment of the fine. The High Court also directed that the District Magistrate be detained in civil prison for a period of two weeks.
Fact of the Case:
The District Magistrate, Allahabad, Sri Anirudh Pandey, passed a requisition order on 27th April, 1973, for requisitioning a house in the City of Allahabad for a public purpose. The owners of the house filed a writ petition (No. 2772 of 1973) before the Allahabad High Court challenging the validity of the requisition proceedings and claiming relief for the quashing of the notice dated 7th April, 1973. On 27th April, 1973, the High Court issued notice to the respondents in the writ petition and passed an interim order restraining them from proceeding with the requisition proceedings until further orders of the Court. Despite the interim order, the District Magistrate served the requisition order on the owners of the house on 28th April, 1973. The owners filed an amendment application seeking amendment in the writ petition and a stay application seeking relief for the issue of an interim order suspending the operation of the requisition order. The High Court issued notice to the District Magistrate to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt of Court. The District Magistrate and his Reader, Jagdish Chandra, appeared before the High Court and filed their affidavits and contested the notices issued to them.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court held that the District Magistrate and his Reader had wilfully disobeyed the interim order of the High Court dated 27th April, 1973, and were guilty of contempt of Court.
Issues: Whether the District Magistrate and his Reader had wilfully disobeyed the interim order of the High Court dated 27th April, 1973.
Ratio Decidendi: The High Court held that the District Magistrate and his Reader had wilfully disobeyed the interim order of the High Court dated 27th April, 1973, and were guilty of contempt of Court. The High Court imposed a fine of Rs. 500 on Jagdish Chandra and directed that he be detained in civil prison for a week in default of payment of the fine. The High Court also directed that the District Magistrate be detained in civil prison for a period of two weeks.
Final Decision: The High Court imposed a fine of Rs. 500 on Jagdish Chandra and directed that he be detained in civil prison for a week in default of payment of the fine. The High Court also directed that the District Magistrate be detained in civil prison for a period of two weeks.
K. N. Singh, J. :- Messrs. Kalloo Mal Visheshar Prasad is a partnership firm having Ram Gopal and Durga Prasad as its partners. They own house, old No. 7 and new No. 106, Rambagh, in the City of Allahabad. Proceedings under the U.P. Temporary Accommodation Requisition Act. 1974, for requisitioning that house were initiated by the District Magistrate, Allahabad. A notice dated 7th April, 1973, was issued by Sri Anirudh Pandey, the then District Magistrate, Allahabad, under Section 3 of the said Act to the owners of the aforesaid house requiring them to show cause why the house in question be not requisitioned for a public purpose. The owners appeared and filed objections before the District Magistrate. Arguments were heard on 25th April, 1973, but before any final order could be passed the owners filed a writ petition (No. 2772 of 1973) before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of the requisition proceedings and claiming relief for the quashing of the notice dated 7th April, 1973. The Secretary to the Government of U.P. Home Department, the Senior Superintendent of Police. Allahabad, Sri Anirudh Pandey, District Magistrate, Allahabad and Sri S. K. Chatterji. Zone Officer, Intelligence, were arrayed as respondents to the petition. On 27th April, 1973, we issued notice to the respondents in the writ petition. On the stay application filed by the owners, we passed the following order :-
"Issue notice.
The respondents are hereby restrained from proceeding with the requisition proceedings of the premises in dispute until further orders of this Court".
We passed the above order after hearing and in the presence of Sri S. N. Upadhya, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.
2. On 30th April, 1973, an amendment application was filed by the owners seeking amendment in the writ petition. In the affidavit filed along with that amendment application, it was stated that the certified copy of the interim order of this Court dated 27th April, 1973, was not accepted by the Reader of the District Magistrate, Allahabad, and the District Magistrate did not comply with the order, instead he passed a requisition order and served the same on the landlords on 28th April, 1973, at about 2 p.m. Along with the amendment application, a stay application was also filed seeking relief for the issue of an interim order suspending the operation of the requisition order. Both the applications came up for orders before a learned Single Judge of this Court, who directed that the matter be placed before this Bench. Thereafter the writ petition, the amendment application and the second stay application were listed before this Bench. On a perusal of the affidavit filed by Uma Shanker Maheshwari, son of Ram Gopal, a partner of the petitioner firm, and the affidavit of Sri A. Kumar, Advocate of this Court, we issued notice to the then District Magistrate, Allahabad, Sri Anirudh Pandey, to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt of Court. Subsequently, a similar notice was issued to Jagdish Chandra. Reader of the District Magistrate. Both the persons appeared before us and filed their affidavits and contested the notices issued to them. These are the facts which gave rise to the contempt proceedings against the District Magistrate, and his Reader Jagdish Chandra.
3. Before we consider the merits of the contempt proceedings, it is necessary to refer to certain facts which would disclose the background giving rise to the present proceedings. The building in question was in the tenancy of the State Government which was occupied by the Police Department. The petitioners who are owners of the house filed Suit No. 89 of 1968 for ejectment and arrears of rent against the State Government. Senior Supdt. of Police, Allahabad, and the Collector, Allahabad. The suit was decreed by the trial Court and on appeal first appellate Court affirmed the decree. Defendants preferred a Second Appeal before this Co
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
