Allahabad High Court
Pratap Singh Baghel vs Manayta Pratap Teachers ... on 22 February, 2023
Bench: Attau Rahman Masoodi, Om Prakash Shukla
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Court No. - 10
Case :- CONTEMPT APPEAL No. - 2 of 2023
Appellant :- Pratap Singh Baghel
Respondent :- Manayta Pratap Teachers Association Thru. President Kali Charan Singh Arya And Others
Counsel for Appellant :- Ran Vijay Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- Dr. Ravi Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J.
Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.
Heard Sri Upendra Nath Misra assisted by Sri Ran Vijai Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and Dr L. P. Misra assisted by Dr Ravi Kumar Mishra for the respondents.
What led us to interfere in the present contempt appeal is only an observation made in paragraph 22 of the impugned order and for ready reference the same is reproduced under:
"22. On overall consideration, I found the respondents guilty for deliberately and willfully committing contempt of order of this Court dated 14.02.2013 passed in Writ Petition No.1152 (S/S) of 2012; Manyata Prapt Teachers Association and others Vs. State of U.P. and others, which was further clarified vide order dated 30.07.2014 and, therefore, following charges are framed against the respondents:
a) That, you, Deepak Kumar - Principal Secretary, Basic Education, U.P., Pratap Singh Baghel - Secretary, Basic Education, U.P. and Shubha Singh - Director, Basic Education, U.P. have been served with copy of the orders of this Court dated 14.02.2023 & 30.07.2014 at your office but you did not comply with the same in true letter and spirit. By your such act and conduct showing utter disregard to the order of this Court, you intentionally and willfully committed violation of the orders of this Court, scandalized the Court, lowered the dignity of the Court and obstructed the administration of justice.
b) That, you, Deepak Kumar - Principal Secretary, Basic Education, U.P., Pratap Singh Baghel - Secretary, Basic Education, U.P. and Shubha Singh - Director, Basic Education, U.P. when the applicants again went with the order of this Court to serve you copy of the judgment and order, you willfully and intentionally committed contempt of the orders of this Court in not removing the illegality, which was directed by this Court and the same is existing till date."
Undisputedly, charges are simultaneously framed and the proceedings have yet to culminate. The observation made in paragraph 22 seems to be an inadvertent mistake.
We are conscious of the fact that the proceedings before the writ court as well as the appellate proceedings have attained finality with the dismissal of SLP and the judgement passed by this Court for its compliance is to be interpreted within the true scope and import of the decision rendered by the court.
Needless to say that all such aspects shall be considered in the contempt proceedings and at this stage we do not find any convincing reason to interfere barring for the clarification made above.
It shall be open to the appellant to avail the remedy if he is so aggrieved, on culmination of the contempt proceedings and time for availing the remedy may be safeguarded by the contempt court before an order passed adverse to the interest of the appellant, if any, is executed.
We have observed so, looking to the fact that the order passed by the writ court has attained finality and the right of hearing of the present appellant is reserved only within the scope of Contempt of Court Act, 1971.
We also provide that the time for filing explanation by the petitioner may be extended by a period of ten days.
The contempt appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Order Date :- 22.2.2023
Fahim/-
