Gourang Charan Panda vs Jyotir Maya Rath
2023 Latest Caselaw 11344 Ori

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                          CONTC No.1043 of 2020

Gourang Charan Panda                .....                                  Petitioner
                                                           Mr.P.K.Rout, Advocate
                                    Vs.
Jyotir Maya Rath, Engineer-In-      .....                Opposite Party/Contemnor
Chief, WRD, BBSR
                                                                  Mr.G.N.Rout, ASC

                    CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

                                           ORDER

15.09.2023 Order No. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

08.

2. Learned Counsel for the parties are present.

3. Vide order dated 01.09.2023, the matter was adjourned to today with a direction to file Compliance Affidavit in the meantime with an observation that, if the Contemnor fails to do so he shall remain present before this Court at 2.00 PM to explain as to why he shall not be prosecuted under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for willful flouting of the order passed by the Tribunal, which has been confirmed by this Court vide order dated 28.01.2020 in W.P.(C) No.2950 of 2020.

4. Instead of filing of Compliance Affidavit, a Show Cause Affidavit has been filed on 14.09.2023 indicating therein that the case of the present Petitioner is different from the case in State of Odisha v. Bikah Ranjan Dash reported in 2021 SCC online Ori 1939. Therefore, the observation made by this Court in Bikash Ranjan Dash (supra) is not applicable to the present Petitioner.

5. That apart, it has been indicated in the Show Cause Affidavit that the Bikash Ranjan Dash (supra) case is yet to attain finality, as

the State has preferred Special Leave Petition before the apex Court since 04.03.2023, which has been registered as Diary Entry No.9712 of 2023 and the said matter is pending for hearing along with Case No.0-22320/2023.

6. So far as order passed in O.A. No.1068 of 2019, this Court vide order dated 28.01.2020 passed in W.P.(C) No.2950 of 2020 directed to work out the direction given by the Tribunal in O.A. No.1068 of 2019 within a period of one month from the date of production of the certified copy of the said order along with copy of the Writ Petition. Instead of acting upon the said direction given by the Coordinate Bench in W.P.(C) No.2950 of 2020, the State preferred W.P.(C) No.8852 of 2020 challenging the order passed by the Tribunal in O.A. No.1068 of 2019. However, the said Writ Petition was disposed of vide order dated 02.08.2022 recording the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties to the effect that the issue involved in the said case is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in Bikash Ranjan Dash (supra). The said order is extracted below:-

"2. Heard Mr. S. N. Nayak, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State and Mr. P.K. Rout, learned Counsel for the Opposite Parties.

3. It is agreed by learned counsel for the parties that the issue involved in this case is squarely covered by the judgment of this court in State of Odisha v. Bikash Ranjan Dash, 2021 SCC Online Ori 1839.

4. In view of the above, this Writ Petition stands disposed of in terms of the Judgment of this Court in Bikash Ranjan Dash (supra)."

7. A query being made by the Court, Mr. Rout, learned ASC fairly submits, no step has been taken by the State for recalling the order dated 28.01.2020 passed in W.P.(C) No.2950 of 2020 so also recalling/reviewing the order dated 02.08.2022 passed in W.P.(C) No.8852 of 2020.

8. However, in the Show Cause Affidavit dated 14.09.2023, in para 8, it has been indicated that clarification has been sought for by the Government in Department of Water Resources from the Law Department, wherein a proposal has been made for seeking review of the order dated 02.08.2022 passed in W.P.(C) No.8852 of 2020 on the ground that case of the Petitioner is different from the case Bikah Ranjan Das so also on the ground that the case of Bikah Ranjan Das (supra) is now subjudice before the Apex Court.

9. It has further been stated in the Show Cause Affidavit, as the concurrence of the Law Department is awaiting, the Review Petition could not be moved. It has also been stated that the present deponent being the functionary of the State, cannot take a decision of his own on any legal matter without due concurrence of appropriate Department. Hence, it has been prayed in the Show Cause Affidavit to drop the present contempt proceeding and dispense with the personal appearance of the Contemnor as directed by this Court vide order dated 01.09.2023.

10. Mr. Rout, learned ASC submits, the Contemnor has highest regard towards the order passed by this Court and is duty bound to comply the order of this Court. He could not remain present today before this Court in terms of the order dated 01.09.2023, as he is out of State to attend some urgent pre-scheduled official work.

11. In view of such submission made by the learned Counsel for the Contemnor, matter be listed on 13th October, 2023. Appropriate order be obtained and produced on or before the adjourned date to satisfy this Court that order dated 28.01.2020 passed in W.P.(C) No.2950 of 2020 and order dated 02.08.2022 passed in W.P.(C) No.8852 of 2020 have been recalled/reviewed. Or else the Contemnor is to comply the order dated 28.01.2020 passed in W.P.(C) No.2950 of 2020 and file Compliance Affidavit by the next date, failing which the Contemnor shall remain present before this Court at 2.00 P.M. on the adjourned date to show case as to why he shall not be prosecuted under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for non-compliance of order dated 28.01.2020 passed in W.P.(C) No.2950 of 2020.

(S.K.MISHRA) JUDGE

Banita

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BANITA PRIYADARSHINI PALEI Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: AUTHENTICATION Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK.