Kattakindi Brahmachary vs Mohammad Afzal Bee And 21 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 4268 Tel

      THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
                                      AND
         THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY



            CONTEMPT APPEAL No.17 of 2020



JUDGMENT:    (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)



     Heard Mr. Parsa Ananth Nageswar Rao, learned

Government Pleader appearing for the appellant and

Mr. A.Prabhakar Rao, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. This contempt appeal is preferred against the order

dated 24.01.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge in

Contempt Case No.1920 of 2018 convicting the appellant

for contempt and sentencing him to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-

within four weeks; in default to suffer imprisonment for a

month.

3. The genesis of the contempt litigation is traceable to

order dated 29.12.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge

disposing of W.P.No.43189 of 2017 filed by respondents

No.1 to 18 as the writ petitioners.

4. Writ petitioners contended before the learned Single

Judge that they had preferred an appeal, being

F1/178/2016 before Revenue Divisional Officer,

Bhupalpally Division, Warangal District, under the

Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1997 along

with stay application. However, no steps were taken by the

Revenue Divisional Officer to either hear the appeal or take

a decision on the stay petition. In the meanwhile,

constructions were being carried out on the land assigned

to the predecessors of the writ petitioners by the

governmental authorities.

5. During the hearing of the writ petition, learned

Government Pleader for Revenue submitted before the

Court that Revenue Divisional Officer would decide the

appeal within two months. In view of the statement made,

the writ petition was disposed of by order dated 29.12.2017

directing Revenue Divisional Officer to decide the appeal

within two months from 29.12.2017 and till disposal of the

appeal, authorities were directed that there should be no

construction on the subject land.

6. Alleging wilful and deliberate violation of the

aforesaid order of the writ Court, writ petitioners filed

Contempt Case No.1920 of 2018. Learned Single Judge by

order dated 24.01.2020 noted that on 12.04.2019 the

appeal was disposed of by the Revenue Divisional Officer.

Noting that there was considerable delay in disposing of

the appeal by the Revenue Divisional Officer, learned

Single Judge allowed the contempt case and convicted the

appellant for wilful disobedience of the order dated

29.12.2017 passed in W.P.No.43189 of 2017, further

sentencing him to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- with default

stipulation that he would suffer imprisonment for a period

of one month in case of default in payment of fine.

7. Appellant was serving as the Revenue Divisional

Officer at the relevant point of time. He has explained that

writ petitioners had filed appeal on 05.02.2016 before the

then Revenue Divisional Officer, Mulugu. Upon formation

of new revenue division with headquarter at Bhupalpally

with effect from 11.10.2016, the appeal was transferred to

the new revenue division on the basis of jurisdiction.

Appeal was taken up for hearing on 15.03.2018. As there

were three more similar appeals, there was a request for

clubbing of all the appeals. However, such a prayer was

not acceded to. When the appeal was taken up for hearing

on 24.03.2018, learned counsel for the writ petitioners

requested for furnishing of records, for which the hearing

was deferred to 07.04.2018 on which date also learned

counsel for the writ petitioners sought for time to file

written arguments. In the meanwhile, Bar Association,

Bhupalpally, requested not to take up any matter during

the summer holidays. Thereafter, the appeals were

adjourned as the employees were entrusted with the

election duties in connection with general elections of

2018. Appellant was transferred from Bhupalpally on

30.08.2018 for which he could not dispose of the appeal.

His successor officer filed an application before this Court

on 22.10.2018 for extension of time to dispose of the

appeal. During pendency of the extension petition, the

appeal was disposed of on 12.04.2019, copy of which was

communicated to the writ petitioners.

8. In view of the aforesaid facts as narrated by the

appellant and not controverted by the writ petitioners, we

feel that it would not be proper to hold the appellant guilty

of contempt. We do not find that there was any wilful or

intentional disobedience of the appellant to the order of

this Court. Every infraction of a Court's order may not be

a matter of contempt. We are satisfied with the

explanation furnished and, therefore, we discharge the

appellant from the conviction of contempt and set aside the

order dated 24.01.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge

in Contempt Case No.1920 of 2018.

9. At this stage, we have been informed that appellant

has already paid the fine to the Registry of this Court on

19.07.2021.

10. Registry is directed to refund the aforesaid amount to

the appellant.

11. Contempt appeal is accordingly allowed.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall

stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

______________________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ

______________________________________ B.VIJAYSEN REDDY, J

24.08.2022 vs