THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY
CONTEMPT APPEAL No.17 of 2020
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)
Heard Mr. Parsa Ananth Nageswar Rao, learned
Government Pleader appearing for the appellant and
Mr. A.Prabhakar Rao, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. This contempt appeal is preferred against the order dated 24.01.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge in Contempt Case No.1920 of 2018 convicting the appellant for contempt and sentencing him to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- within four weeks; in default to suffer imprisonment for a month.
3. The genesis of the contempt litigation is traceable to order dated 29.12.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge 2 disposing of W.P.No.43189 of 2017 filed by respondents No.1 to 18 as the writ petitioners.
4. Writ petitioners contended before the learned Single Judge that they had preferred an appeal, being F1/178/2016 before Revenue Divisional Officer, Bhupalpally Division, Warangal District, under the Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1997 along with stay application. However, no steps were taken by the Revenue Divisional Officer to either hear the appeal or take a decision on the stay petition. In the meanwhile, constructions were being carried out on the land assigned to the predecessors of the writ petitioners by the governmental authorities.
5. During the hearing of the writ petition, learned Government Pleader for Revenue submitted before the Court that Revenue Divisional Officer would decide the appeal within two months. In view of the statement made, the writ petition was disposed of by order dated 29.12.2017 directing Revenue Divisional Officer to decide the appeal 3 within two months from 29.12.2017 and till disposal of the appeal, authorities were directed that there should be no construction on the subject land.
6. Alleging wilful and deliberate violation of the aforesaid order of the writ Court, writ petitioners filed Contempt Case No.1920 of 2018. Learned Single Judge by order dated 24.01.2020 noted that on 12.04.2019 the appeal was disposed of by the Revenue Divisional Officer. Noting that there was considerable delay in disposing of the appeal by the Revenue Divisional Officer, learned Single Judge allowed the contempt case and convicted the appellant for wilful disobedience of the order dated 29.12.2017 passed in W.P.No.43189 of 2017, further sentencing him to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation that he would suffer imprisonment for a period of one month in case of default in payment of fine.
7. Appellant was serving as the Revenue Divisional Officer at the relevant point of time. He has explained that writ petitioners had filed appeal on 05.02.2016 before the 4 then Revenue Divisional Officer, Mulugu. Upon formation of new revenue division with headquarter at Bhupalpally with effect from 11.10.2016, the appeal was transferred to the new revenue division on the basis of jurisdiction. Appeal was taken up for hearing on 15.03.2018. As there were three more similar appeals, there was a request for clubbing of all the appeals. However, such a prayer was not acceded to. When the appeal was taken up for hearing on 24.03.2018, learned counsel for the writ petitioners requested for furnishing of records, for which the hearing was deferred to 07.04.2018 on which date also learned counsel for the writ petitioners sought for time to file written arguments. In the meanwhile, Bar Association, Bhupalpally, requested not to take up any matter during the summer holidays. Thereafter, the appeals were adjourned as the employees were entrusted with the election duties in connection with general elections of 2018. Appellant was transferred from Bhupalpally on 30.08.2018 for which he could not dispose of the appeal. His successor officer filed an application before this Court 5 on 22.10.2018 for extension of time to dispose of the appeal. During pendency of the extension petition, the appeal was disposed of on 12.04.2019, copy of which was communicated to the writ petitioners.
8. In view of the aforesaid facts as narrated by the appellant and not controverted by the writ petitioners, we feel that it would not be proper to hold the appellant guilty of contempt. We do not find that there was any wilful or intentional disobedience of the appellant to the order of this Court. Every infraction of a Court's order may not be a matter of contempt. We are satisfied with the explanation furnished and, therefore, we discharge the appellant from the conviction of contempt and set aside the order dated 24.01.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge in Contempt Case No.1920 of 2018.
9. At this stage, we have been informed that appellant has already paid the fine to the Registry of this Court on 19.07.2021.
6
10. Registry is directed to refund the aforesaid amount to the appellant.
11. Contempt appeal is accordingly allowed.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
______________________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ ______________________________________ B.VIJAYSEN REDDY, J 24.08.2022 vs