Hon’ble Vikram Nath, J.—“Disobedience of orders of the Court strikes at the very root of the rule of law on which the judicial system rests. The rule of law is the foundation of a democratic society. The Judiciary is the guardian of the rule of law. If the judiciary is to perform its duties and functions effectively and remain true to the spirit with which it is sacredly entrusted, the dignity and authority of the Courts have to be respected and protected at all costs”.

The above is an extract from a recent judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Maninderjit Singh Bitta v. Union of India and others, (2012) 1 SCC 273.

2. Material on record of this contempt petition unfolds a blatant and glaring case of continuous and many faceted deliberate and wilfull disobedience of an injunction order obtained by the opposite party No. 4 from this Court. A huge plot of land admittedly situate within the domain and supervision of Cantonment Board, Meerut (hereinafter referred to as the Board) measuring 9.06 acres has been divided into dozens of plots, sold to different persons and a whole colony constructed containing palatial residential buildings, shopping and commercial complexes including a Mall in gross violation of the injunction order. Opposite party No. 4 got a power of attorney executed in his favour from opposite parties No. 1 to 3 and thereafter proceeded to sell plots, get buildings raised without any sanction or approval of the Board and in the process himself raised three huge constructions and encouraged the purchasers to raise their individual constructions all without getting any building maps being approved by the Board in gross violation and disregard to the Rules, Regulations and Bye-laws of the Board and of course in violation of the injunction order.

3. The Court is shocked at the courage, boldness, mischief and the deep rooted disregard shown by the opposite party No. 4 in committing the grossest contempt continuing for years together. He has also been dishonest and deceitful in not disclosing to purchasers about the pending litigation and the injunction orders passed by the High Court. The facts recorded in this order leaves the Court with no option but to award the maximum punishment permissible under law and issue other necessary directions in the interest of justice.

4. This contempt application filed by Cantonment Executive Officer and President of the Cantonment Board, Meerut Cantonment under Section 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 1971 Act) alleges disobedience of the order dated 13th April, 1995 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in First Appeal From Order No. 298 of 1995 - Smt. Pushpa Devi and others v. Cantonment Board Meerut and others. In the contempt application (i) Smt. Pushpa Devi wife of Late Sumant Prasad Jain, (ii) Chandra Prakash Jain S/o Late Sumant Prasad Jain (iii) Vijay Prakash Jain S/o late Sumant Prakash Jain and (iv) Sri Anand Prakash Agarwal S/o Dhan Prakash Agarwal {holding power of attorney of opposite parties (i) to (iii)} have been impleaded as opposite parties. Order dated 13.4.1995 passed by the Division Bench in the aforementioned First Appeal From Order reads as follows :

“Sri A. K. Sinha has accepted the notices on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2. He prays for and is granted three weeks time to file counter-affidavit. Appellant will have one week thereafter to file rejoinder-affidavit.

List this appeal immediately after expiry of aforesaid period.

Meanwhile, parties are directed to maintain status quo with regard to Bunglow No. 210-B, Western Road, Meerut Cantt. Appellants shall also not raise any further construction nor respondents shall demolish any construction."

5. There is a property described as Bungalow No. 210-B, West End Road, Meerut Cantonment, Meerut. The said property is alleged to be owned by Government of India and managed by Defence Estate Officer, Meerut. As per the extract from the General Land Register (GLR) the prop