IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR WA No. 413 of 2026 (BHOPAL MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND OTHERS Vs MARLIN BUILDCON PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS )

Dated : 06-02-2026 Shri H.S. Ruprah - Senior Advocate with Shri Suyash Mohan Guru-

Advocate , Shri Dev Sharma, Shri Deepanshu Rai, Shri Akshat Agrawal, Shri Shashank Patel, Shri Akash Malpani - Advocates for the appellants.

Shri Rahul Rawat and Shri Pramod Kumar Thakre - Advocates for the respondent No.1.

1. On the oral prayer of the appellant Ms. Sanskriti Jain, Commissioner Municipal Corporation, Bhopal is permitted to be impleaded as an appellant.

2. Let the affidavit of the appellant and amended memo of parties be filed during the course of the day.

3. Appellant impugns order dated 27.01.2026, whereby a show cause notice has been issued to the Commissioner Municipal Corporation, Bhopal as to why contempt proceedings be not initiated against her for breach of orders passed by the Supreme Court in the case of " Directions in the matter of Demolition of Structures (In Ref.) (2025) SCC 1.''

4. Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the entire petition filed by the respondent does not take into account that the appellant has duly followed the procedure as prescribed by the Supreme Court. He further submits that in terms of Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the High Court is empowered to initiate proceedings for contempt only of wilful breach of its own orders or orders of a court subordinate to it.

5. Learned senior counsel further submits that there is no allegations in the entire petition that the appellant has committed breach of any order or direction passed by the High Court or any court subordinate to it. Reference is drawn to judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Vitusah Oberoi and Ors. vs. Court of Its Own Motion (2017) 2 SCC 314 to contend that the Supreme Court has held the High Court is empowered to initiate proceedings for contempt of its orders or orders of any Court subordinate to it but is not empowered to initiate proceedings suo motu or otherwise for the contempt of orders of a superior court like the Supreme Court.

6. Learned senior counsel further submits that on 05.02.2026, the appellant has been held guilty of flouting the directions for orders passed by the Supreme Court In Directions the matter of Demolition of Structures (Supra) and the matter is listed today for hearing on the quantum of punishment. He submits that since the order was made available late in the evening on 05.02.2026, an appeal against that order has been filed being WA No.414/2026, however the same has not yet been listed.

7. Issue notice.

8. Notice is accepted by learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 and he prays for some time to address arguments.

9. Notice shall issue to respondent No. 2 and 3, humdust in addition, returnable on 18.02.2026.

10. Reference may be had to the judgment of Supreme Court in Vitusah Oberoi and Ors (Supra) , wherein the Supreme Court has held as under;

''9. The provisions of Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 also empower the High Court to punish for its own contempt or the contempt of Courts subordinate to it. Section 10 reads:

“10. Power of High Court to punish contempts of subordinate courts.—Every High Court shall have and exercise the same jurisdiction, powers and authority, in accordance with the same procedure and practice, in respect of contempt of courts subordinate to it as it has and exercises in respect of contempts of itself:

Provided that no High Court shall take cognizance of a contempt alleged to have been committed in respect of a court subordinate to it where such contempt is an offence punishable under the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).”

10. There is, from a plain reading of the above, nothing in the Contempt of Courts Act or in Article 215 of the Constitution which can be said to empower the High Court to initiate proceedings suo-motu or otherwise for the contempt of a superior Court like th