Pradeep Kumar Parida And vs Satyabrata Sahu And
2023 Latest Caselaw 7636 Ori

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                          CONTC. No.2648 of 2023

 Pradeep Kumar Parida and                               Petitioners
 others                              ....
                                           Mr. A. Tripathy, Advocate
                                -versus-
 Satyabrata Sahu and                 ....          Opposite Parties/
 others                                              Contemners
                                            Mr. S.N. Pattanaik, AGA
                                                                   (fo



                 CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

                                        ORDER

Order No.                             14.07.2023

  4.        1.      The matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Learned Counsel for the Parties are present.

3. In response to the argument advanced by Mr. Pattnaik, learned AGA appearing for the Contemners as to maintainability of the present proceeding on the ground of limitation , Mr. Tripathy, learned Counsel for the Petitioners draws attention of this Court to the provisions enshrined under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and submits, in terms of the said provision, the limitation starts from the date on which the contempt alleged to have committed. He further draws attention of the Court to provisions enshrined under Article 215 of the Constitution of India and submits, in terms of the said provision, every High Court shall be a court of record and shall have all the powers of such a court, including the power to punish for contempt of itself. He draws attention to the averments made in Paragraph 3 of the Contempt Petition and submits, though no Writ Appeal has been preferred by the State against the judgment dated 09.09.2021 in W.P.(C) No.21237 of 2020 but in Writ Appeal No.777 of 2021 and batch, the State challenged identical Orders passed by the coordinate Bench, which is pertaining to regularization of DEOs and the same was pending till 12.04.2023. After dismissal of the said Appeals by the Division Bench, confirming the impugned judgments challenged in Writ Appeal No.772 of 2021 and batch, the Petitioner has rightly approached this Court in the present Contempt Petition as the cause of action arose only on 12.04.2023 i.e. after dismissal of the said Writ Appeals.

4. Mr. Pattnaik, learned AGA hands up copy of the judgment dated 12.04.2023 passed in Writ Appeal No.777 of 2021 and batch, and draws attention of this Court to the concluding paragraph of the said judgment, which is reproduced below:

"47. For the aforementioned reasons, the Court is not persuaded to interfere with the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge. It should now be implemented in letter and spirit within a period of twelve weeks. The writ appeals are dismissed, but in the circumstances, with no order as to costs."

5. Mr. Pattnaik further submits, though it has been contended in Paragraph-3 of the Contempt Petition that the Petitioner was awaiting for the final outcome of Writ Appeal No.777 of 2021 and batch, and there is an averment to the effect that his case is similar to the judgments, which were subject matter of challenge in Writ Appeal No.777 of 2021 and batch, the present Contempt Petition was initiated immediately after dismissal of the said Writ Appeals without waiting for twelve weeks, which expired only on 12.07.2023 . Hence, the present Contempt Petition, being filed well before the said date, should be dismissed.

6. Mr. Tripathy, in response to such submission made by Mr. Pattanaik, submits that during pendency of the present Contempt Petition, the said period has expired and there is no legal barrier now to proceed further against the Contemners for willful flouting of the judgment dated 09.09.2021 passed in W.P.(C) No.21237 of 2020.

7. At this juncture Mr. Pattnaik submits, he may be permitted three weeks' time to take instruction as to what steps have been taken by the Authority concerned for implementation of the judgment passed by the coordinate Bench, which was confirmed by the 1st Division Bench. Prayer for time is allowed. Matter be listed on 04.08.2023.

8. Show Cause Affidavit be filed on adjourned date, which will be accepted upon advanced copy served on the learned Counsel for the Petitioner.

(S. K. MISHRA) padma JUDGE

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: PADMA CHARAN DASH Designation: Secretary In-Charge Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 18-Jul-2023 11:38:57