High Court of Madhya Pradesh
Atul Sreedharan, J.
SONA BAI - APPELLANT
Versus
VINOD SINGH BAGHEL, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, TRIBAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, MANTRALAYA & ORS. - RESPONDENTS
CONC-1455 of 2014
Decided On : 13-01-2021
Contempt Petition - Non-compliance of Court Order - Writ Petition - Circular dated 17-3-1978 - W. A. No. 85/2011 - Judgment of this Court - Compliance within two weeks
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a daily wage cook, sought regular pay-scale based on a circular dated 17-3-1978 and a judgment in W. A. No. 85/2011. The court ordered the respondents to consider the petitioner's claim within three months, but the order was not complied with for seven years.
Finding of the Court:
The State's inaction for seven years showed sheer insensitivity and dereliction. The State's reliance on a clarificatory note of 2014 was misplaced as the decision should have been taken by 3rd July, 2013. The court noted the State's repeated non-compliance and leniency shown by the court, and directed the respondent to comply with the order within two weeks.
Issues: Non-compliance of court order, delay in decision-making, reliance on subsequent developments beyond the specified period
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of timely compliance with court orders and held the State responsible for its inaction. It clarified that subsequent developments after the specified period could not be considered for deciding the case.
Final Decision: The respondent No. 3 was directed to take a decision within two weeks strictly in accordance with the order dated 18-1-2013, considering the judgment of this Court and circular dated 17-3-1978, and any other circular or order passed on or before 3-7-2013, which may have the effect of superseding the government order dated 17-3-1978.
ORDER/JUDGMENT (Heard through Video Conferencing.) Mr. Aditya Sanghi, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Pushpendra Yadav, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent/State.
Mr. Lakhan Agrawal, Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, has joined this Court through Video Conferencing.
2. The present contempt petition has been filed in the year 2014. The order which is said to have been not complied with by the State was passed on 18-1-2013 passed in W. P. No. 806/2013(S).
3. Briefly, the facts are that the petitioner who is a daily wage cook employed in the Government Post Matric Scheduled Caste Boys Hostel, Raipura, District- Burhanpur since 14-9-1992, filed a writ petition seeking direction to the respondents, who are the State of Madhya Pradesh through the Principal Secretary, Tribal Welfare, the Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Bhopal, Collector Welfare Department Burhanpur and the Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Burhanpur that regular pay-scale be granted to the petitioner in the light of circular dated 17-3-1978. At that juncture, it was urged before this Court that the aforesaid circular gave daily wage employees engaged in the Tribal Welfare Department, the benefit which has been given by the order passed in W. A. No. 85/2011, Dhanu Bai vs. State of M. P. and others decided on 27-8-2011, by the Division Bench of this Court at Indore. Direction was sought that the respondents consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the decision rendered in Dhannu Bai (supra). The hearing was bi-parte, and the Government Advocate appearing for the State had no objection if such an innocuous direction was given to the respondents. Therefore, the petition was disposed of vide order dated 18-1-2013 with a direction to the respondents “to consider the claim of the petitioner as per decision rendered in Dhannu Bai (supra). While considering the claim of the petitioner, respondents would be at liberty to take into consideration subsequent circular issued by the State Government in respect of grant of wages to daily wage employees and if these circulars supersedes the government order dated 17-3-1978, the respondents would be at liberty to take into consideration such subsequent development while considering the claim of the petitioner. Let a decision be taken within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order.”
4. Annexure-C/2 to the petition at page-11 is the acknowledgement from the office of the Collector, District-Burhanpur dated 3-4-2013 with regard to the receipt of the copy of the order passed by this Court on 18-1-2013 passed in W. P. No. 806/2013 (S). The said acknowledgement also discloses that there are no vacant posts of daily wagers in the unreserved category in Burhanpur District and, therefore, the case of the petitioner was being filed and in future if vacancies opened up in unreserved category for regular post and taking into consideration the seniority, the regularization of the petitioner would be done. It is essential to mention here that the said acknowledgement dated 3-4-2013 is in a cyclostyled format with only the name of the parties, case number and the date of the order entered by hand. This petition, however, filed by the petitioner sought the grant of regular pay-scale and not regularization on the posts.
5. Under the circumstances, it is clear that the respondents were aware with the order passed by this Court atleast from 3-4-2013, if not before that. Thereafter, seven years have passed for the compliance of the said order and the case has been listed for several times and it only after this Court passed the order dated 18-12-2020 that the Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Burhanpur has joined the Video Conferencing today.
6. Learned counsel for the State and the Contemner have put-forth the following arguments. First of all, he has stated that R/3 Mr. Lakhan Agrawal, Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare De
Timely compliance with court orders, responsibility of the State to adhere to court decisions
The court cannot review the validity of a rejection order in contempt proceedings.
The word “wilful” introduces a mental element and hence, requires looking into the mind of a person/contemnor by gauging his actions, which is an indication of one's state of mind. “Wilful” means kno....
The judgment emphasizes the importance of satisfying specific conditions for employment regularization and the lack of deliberate violation of court orders by the respondents.
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.