Kerala High Court
Smt.Rani Jose vs Jinu Dominic on 23 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JULY 2021 / 1ST SRAVANA, 1943
CON.CASE(C) NO. 607 OF 2020
AGAINST THE ORDER IN WP(C) 26193/2016 DATED 6.8.2016 OF HIGH COURT
OF KERALA
PETITIONER/S:
SMT.RANI JOSE
AGED 56 YEARS
W/O.(LATE) JOSEPH JOSEPH, KALLARACKAL HOUSE,
PRAVITHANAMKARA, BHARANANGANAM VILLAGE, MEENACHIL
TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
J.JULIAN XAVIER
SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 JINU DOMINIC
(AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THIS PETITIONER)
(FORMER VILLAGE OFFICER, MARAYOOR VILLAGE UPTO
16.12.2019), PRESENTLY WORKING AS VILLAGE OFFICER,
UPPUTHARA VILLAGE, PEERUMEDU TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT-
685505.
2 SURESH V.A.,
VILLAGE OFFICER MARAYOOR VILLAGE, W.E.F 17.12.2019,
(AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THIS PETITIONER)
PRESENTLY WORKING AS VILLAGE OFFICER, MARAYOOR VILLAGE,
CHATTAMANNAR B.O POST OFFICE, MARAYOOR, DEVIKULAM,
IDUKKI, KERALA-685620.
3 FARRIS P.H.,
S/O.HAMEED, (AGE NOT KNOWN TO THIS PETITIONER)
PARRAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PANAYAPPILLY, THOPPUMPADY, KOCHI-
682005.
4 JOSEPH FERDINAND REBELLOW,(AGE NOT KNOWN TO THIS
PETITIONER)
S/O.FRANCIS, PALLEKKATTIL HOUSE, KANNAMALY, KOCHI-
682005.
CON.CASE(C) NO. 607 OF 2020
2
5 FAREN FERDINAND REBELLOW, (AGE NOT KNOWN TO THIS
PETITIONER)
S/O.FRANCIS, PALLEKKATTIL HOUSE, KANNAMALY, KOCHI-
682005.
6 T.K.SAKEER HUSSAIN, (AGE NOT KNOWN TO THIS PETITIONER)
S/O.T.K.KUNJUMUHAMMED, THRUTHUPPALLY HOUSE,
MATTANCHERY, KOCHI-682002.
7 ASEEM P.H., (AGE NOT KNOWN TO THIS PETITIONER)
S/O.HAMEED, PATTAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PANAYAPPILLY,
THOPPUMPADY, KOCHI-682005.
8 ABDUL RAHES, (AGE NOT KNOWN TO THIS PETITIONER)
S/O.ABDULLA, MUBARAK MANZIL HOUSE, KADIYUR, KANNUR
DISTRICT, KANNUR, PIN-670642.
BY SRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE, SR.GP
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 23.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
CON.CASE(C) NO. 607 OF 2020
3
JUDGMENT
This contempt petition is filed, alleging violation of the interim order
passed by this Court on 06.08.2016 in W.P.(C).No.26193/2016. The order
read thus:-
"Government Pleader takes notice for respondents 1 to
4.
Urgent notice by speed post to respondents 5 to 15
returnable in three weeks. There will be an interim
stay of operation of Ext.P24 series for a period of two
months.
Post after a month."
2. According to the petitioner, in spite of the directions issued by this
Court as above, tax was accepted from the party respondent by the revenue
authorities, directly during the year 2019, and later during 2020-2021,
through online. Therefore, according to the petitioner, the acceptance of tax
by the revenue authorities is a clear violation of the interim directions issued
by this Court.
3. An affidavit was filed before this Court by one Sajith Kumar P. on
18.03.2021, explaining the circumstances and it read thus:-
CON.CASE(C) NO. 607 OF 2020
3. I am submitting the following statements found as per
village records in relation with re.sy.131/1 in Block No.47
Marayoor village, which is dealt in WPC No.26193/16:
It is seen that, this Hon'ble Court has been passed an
interim order in WPC 26193/2016 on 06.08.2016, by
granting two months stay of operations and then on
27.02.2017 stayed operations until further orders in the
above mentioned re.sy.no.131/1 which are included in the
following thandaper numbers of respondents 3 to 8:
Thandaper No.2335 - Farris P.H.
Thandaper No.2334 - Joseph Ferdinand Rebellow
Thandaper No.2333 - Farren Ferdinand Rebellwo
Thandaper No.2332 - T.K.Sakeer Hussain
Thandaper No.2331 - Aseen P.H.
Thandaper No.2336 - Abdul Raber, S/o. Abdulla
4. On examining the above thandapers, it is
seen that necessary entries regarding the interim orders
were not kept or entered with the thandapers, even though
the orders were issued on 27.02.2017. Hence land tax have
been accepted up to 2019-20, directly in the village office
and later the parties remitted land tax through on-line for
the period 2020-21 on 7/2020. The 1 st respondent, Sri. Jinu
Dominic, former village officer were served as village
officer, Marayoor from 22.02.2018 to 17.02.2019 and
CON.CASE(C) NO. 607 OF 2020
respondent No.2 Suresh V.A served as on from 17.12.2019 to
24.04.2020. It is seen that land tax has been accepted, as
eh matter is not entered in the thandaper book or copy of
the interim order is not affixed in the book.
5. In the light of the contempt case filed by the
petitioner, necessary entries has been made in the above
thandapers and removed permissions for remitting land
tax by the respondents 3 to 8, through online in the revenue
web site www.revenue.kerala.gov.in. However, for the
inconveniences, if any, caused to this Hon'ble Court this
respondent tenders unconditional apology."
4. However, a reply affidavit is filed by the petitioner, basically
contending that the explanation offered in the affidavit is by a 3 rd person other
than the persons who have violated the directions issued by this Court, and
therefore, the said affidavit cannot be accepted on its face value. Thereupon,
this Court directed the 1st and 2nd respondents in the contempt petition to file
affidavits separately. Accordingly, the said respondents have filed affidavits,
which read thus:
"Affidavit of the 1st respondent.-
4. It is respectfully submitted that the interim order
was not seen noted/entered in any of the records of
Marayoor Village and on account of this I was not aware of
the order passed by this Hon'ble Court. During my tenure
CON.CASE(C) NO. 607 OF 2020
the petitioner herein had made an application intimating
the interim order of this Hon'ble Court and it was duly
reported to the Tahsildar, Devikulam Taluk vide letter
No.120/2019 dated 13.06.2019.
5. Further, it is submitted that the above Contempt of
Court Case is filed on 19.02.2020 and the acceptance of land
tax by me was without taking note of the interim order was
truly with bonafide as I had not seen any order interdicting
the acceptance of land tax. The acceptance of land tax has
been made as there were no entries made in the relevant
register maintaining in Marayoor Village Office. It is
submitted that now on enquiry it is revealed that proper
notice is made in the Village Office registers regarding the
orders issued by this Hon'ble Court. The order passed by
this Hon'ble Court is now been complied in its true letter
and spirit.
6. I tender my unconditional apology for the
inconveniences caused to this Hon'ble Court. It is humbly
submitted that the acceptance of the land tax had happened
not on account of willful intension but due to the omission in
noting the order of this Hon'ble Court. I tender my
unconditional apology for the oversight happened from my
side. In the above circumstance, it is most humbly prayed
that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to accept this
affidavit and further be pleased to close this Contempt of
Court Case.
Affidavit of the 2nd respondent.-
CON.CASE(C) NO. 607 OF 2020
4. It is respectfully submitted that no endorsement
regarding the interim order passed by this Hon'ble Court
was not seen entered in any of the records of the Marayoor
Village Office and hence I was not aware of the pendency of
this writ petition and the interim order dated 06.08.2016.
5. It is submitted that I had no knowledge nor I was
informed regarding the interim order during my tenure as
Village Officer, Marayoor Village as no documents were
produced before me by the petitioner. Further on enquiry it
was found that now revenue officials attached to Village
Office, Marayoor had taken note of interim order and the
order issued by this Hon'ble Court are now been complied
with in its true letter and spirit.
6. I tender my unconditional apology for the
inconveniences caused to this Hon'ble Court. It is submitted
that I had not done any act willfully in violation to the
order passed by this Hon'ble Court. In the above
circumstances, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble
Court may be pleased to accept this affidavit and further be
pleased to close this Contempt of Court Case."
5. The sum and substance of the contentions contained in the affidavits
is that, even though the interim order was handed over to the Village Officer,
which according to the Village Officer, has forwarded to the Tahsildar, it was
not recorded in the revenue records and therefore, an innocent mistake has
occurred and there was no deliberate or wilful action on the part of the
CON.CASE(C) NO. 607 OF 2020
respondents not to obey the interim directions issued by this Court.
Therefore, according to the respondents, their action cannot be treated as
contumacious in nature, liable to be proceeded under the provisions of the
Contempt of Court Act, 1971.
6. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner Sri. Julian Xavier and
learned Senior Government Pleader Sri. Surin George Ipe,appearing for the
respondents.
7. Admittedly, the interim order passed on 06.08.2016 was handed over
by the petitioner to the Village Officer, who in turn, has forwarded to the
Tahsildar. It was probably for the reason that the order was forwarded during
the year 2016, it was not recorded in the revenue records, the issue pertaining
to this contempt by accepting the tax, which was prevented by this Court, had
happened. It is stated in the affidavits by the respondents 1 and 2 that they
have failed to note the same in the revenue records. The said inaction on the
part of the respondents 1 and 2 cannot be viewed lightly, but however, the
explanation offered by them in the affidavits that it was by an innocent
mistake that they did not record the same in the revenue records, and in the
absence of such an entry alone, the acceptance of the tax during the year 2019
had happened, and for the same reason, they have failed to block the online
CON.CASE(C) NO. 607 OF 2020
payment, which was introduced during the year 2020-2021, can be accepted.
Anyhow, now it is stated that the online payment of tax by the party
respondent is blocked by the revenue authorities and the tax would not be
accepted unless and until any directions are issued by this Court in the writ
petition pending.
8. I have considered the rival submissions made across the Bar and I am
of the considered opinion that, even though the failure on the part of the
respondents 1 and 2 by not making the entry of the interim order passed by
this Court in the concerned ledger of the revenue records, is unpardonable, I
find that there could be a chance that it may be an innocent mistake. Even
though the order was handed over in the year 2016, if an entry was not made
in the concerned ledger, the succeeding officers or any other person accepting
the tax could not be in a position to understand the situation and then block
the party from paying the tax. In that view of the matter, it cannot be said
that there was any illegal, deliberate and contumacious act on the part of the
respondents in complying with the directions contained in the interim order
in question. Therefore, I do not find any reason to pursue the contempt
proceedings any further, however, I make it clear that mere acceptance of tax
overlooking the directions issued by this Court in the interim order specified
supra, shall not in any way benefit the party respondents, and on the basis of
CON.CASE(C) NO. 607 OF 2020
the same, no privilege shall be granted to the party respondents. I have also
no reason to think that the writ petition as well as any suit proceedings
pending would not be considered on its merits, without providing any
advantage of acceptance of the tax during the year 2019 and 2020-2021, in
violation of the interim order passed by this Court.
The contempt of court case is closed accordingly.
Sd/-
SHAJI P.CHALY
JUDGE
uu
26.07.2021.
CON.CASE(C) NO. 607 OF 2020
APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 607/2020
PETITIONER ANNEXURE
ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
06.08.2016 IN W.P.(C)NO.26193/2016.
ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 18.05.2019
FILED BY THE PETITION BEFORE THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
