G.Jogaiah, S/O. Sri Sanjeev vs St. Josephs Education Society,
2021 Latest Caselaw 2064 Tel

Item No.49

     THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
                        AND
     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY

                          C.A.No. 5 OF 2010

JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Hima Kohli)

1.    The appellant is aggrieved by an order dated 05.10.2010,

passed by the learned Single Judge holding him guilty of the contempt

of the undertaking given by his counsel to the court, as recorded in the

order dated 15.06.2009, passed in W.P.No.9225 of 2009.

2.    At the relevant point in time, the appellant was working as a

Station House Officer, Naryanguda Police Station. The respondent

No.1/Society and the respondents No.2 to 6/Members of the

respondent No.1/Society had approached the learned Single Judge

with a grievance that the appellant had violated the statement recorded

by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home that the police

were not interfering in the civil disputes between the Secretary and

Members of the Society. The respondents No.1 to 6/writ petitioners

claim that the appellant had unduly interfered in the affairs of the

Society on 20.03.2010, when the General Body Meeting was

conducted.

3. Noticing the facts of the case, the learned Single Judge had

opined that the appellant had sufficient experience at hand, he was not

naive enough not to understand the scope of the request made to him

by the Secretary of the Society for assistance, under the garb of

disturbance of public order and that he had tried to interfere in the

internal affairs of the Society and gain an upper hand over some of the

Members of the Society. As a result, a sentence of Rs.5,000/- was

imposed on the appellant.

4. Mr. B.Adinarayana Rao, learned Senior Advocate appearing for

the appellant submits that though it has been recorded in the

impugned order that the appellant was trapped in an ACB case, kept

under suspension and later on, dismissed from service on 06.03.1997,

when the order passed by the trial court was taken in appeal, the said

order was quashed and set aside and the appellant was reinstated in

service. He states that the appellant has not faced any contempt

proceedings in his career and had honourably superannuated on the

post of Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police in the month of

June, 2019. All the same, the appellant is willing to contribute to a

social cause if the court would be so inclined.

5. After some discussion, it has been agreed that the appellant

would visit the Home for the Aged situated at Musheerabad and host a

meal for the senior citizens/ residents of the said Home on a Sunday.

Besides hosting a meal, the appellant shall spend some time with the

residents of the Home, which, in our opinion is more valuable than

spending money. It is therefore, directed that apart from the meal that

the appellant shall host for the residents of the Old Age Home at

Musheerabad, on a Sunday, he shall spend one hour on every

Saturday and Sunday, for the next three months with the residents of

the Old Age Home. The In-charge of the Home shall mark his

attendance and after he completes three months, a Report shall be

submitted to this court confirming completion of the period of service

imposed on the appellant. It shall also be confirmed that he had

hosted a meal for the residents of the Old Age Home, as offered by

him.

6. The present appeal is closed along with the pending

applications, if any, while quashing the sentence of Rs.5,000/-

imposed on the appellant. A copy of this order shall be forwarded

directly to the NGO concerned for perusal and compliance. In the

event the Report of the NGO is not placed on record, the Registry

shall place the matter back before this court for appropriate orders.

_________________ HIMA KOHLI, CJ

______________________ B.VIJAYSEN REDDY, J

12.07.2021 Lrkm/Pln