Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

MOHD. QAISERversusL.K. SINHA AND ORS.

Citation
1995 INSC 694
Decided
6 November 1995
Disposal
Disposed off

Holding

Compliance, though belated, was deemed sufficient and the unconditional apology was accepted, leading to disposal of the contempt petition.

Summary

The petitioner, a former railway employee, filed a contempt petition against the General Manager of Northern Railway for failing to comply with a court order directing payment of Rs 50,000. The General Manager claimed he only learned of the order on 27 September 1995, issued a cheque on 29 September, which the petitioner initially refused but later accepted through his counsel. The court observed that compliance had been effected, albeit belatedly, and that the General Manager had initiated disciplinary action against the officials who had delayed compliance. An unconditional apology from the respondents was accepted. Accordingly, the court directed the General Manager to submit a report of the administrative action within 60 days and disposed of the contempt proceedings.

Issues considered

  • Whether the respondent complied with the court's order directing payment to the petitioner
  • Whether the belated compliance suffices to discharge contempt
  • Whether an unconditional apology can extinguish the contempt proceedings
  • Whether administrative action against erring officials is required

Subjects

contempt of courtnon‑compliance with court orderadministrative actionapologyrailway employeejudicial discretion

Judgment

                                     MOHD. QAISER                                         A
                                            v.
                                  L.K. SINHA AND ORS.

                                     NOVEMBER 6, 1995

                       [K. RAMASWAMY AND B.N. KIRPAL, .1.1.J                              B

               Contempt of Court :
:~
                Order of Court-Non-compliance of-Application for initiating con-
         te111pt proceedings against respondents-StejJS taken to con1ply ivith            C
         Order-Adn1inistrative action initiated against c1ring ofjl"cials--Coun accept~
         ing unconditional apology tendered by re,,1Jondents-Direction given to subn1it
         repo1t of adntinistrative action and its result.

               The appellant, a formar Railway employee, filed the present con·           D
         tempt petition against the respondent, who at the relevant time was
         functioning as General Manager, Northern Railway.

               Disposing of the petition, this Court

               HELD : The petitioner was reported to have refused to accept the           E
         cheque, which had been handed over to his counsel across the Bar. The
         compliance has been made though belatedly. The respondent stated that
         action wa.s initiated against the erring otlicials who have defaulted in com-
         pliance of the order of this Court. He would submit the report of the action
         taken and result thereof. lJnt.:onclitional apology accepted. [794-C-D]
                                                                                          F
               CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Contempt Petition (C) No.
         79 of 1995.

                                              IN
                                                                                          G
               Civil Appeal No. 5718 of 1994.

               From the Judgment and Order dated 13.3.91 of the Central Ad-
         ministrative Tribunal, New Delhi in T.A. No. 813 of 1986.

               N.S. Baist for the Petitioner/Appellant.                                   H
                                              793
     '
    794                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995] SUPP. 4 S.C.R.

A        Altaf Ahamed, Additional Solicitor General and A.D.N. Rao for the
    Respomlents.

           The following Order of the Court was ·delivered :

           In the affidavit filed by the respondents, it is staled that the General
B   Manager came to know of the order of this Court for the first time on
    September 27, 1995 and immediately he directed payment of the amount.
    A cheque had been drawn in favour of the petitioner for a sum of Rs.
    50,000 on September 29, 1995 and the cheque was offered to the petitioner.
    It is slated that he refused to accept the cheque on October 1, 1995 and
    then he was informed of the offer by Registered post with A.O. The cheque
c   has been handed over to the counsel for the petitioner across the Bar.
    Under these circumstances, the compliance has been made, though be-
    latedly.

           It is stated by the General Manager that action was initiated against
D the erring officials who had defaulted in compliance of the order of this
    Court. General Manager is directed to submit the report of the action
    taken and the result thereof to the Registry within 60 days from to-day. We
    accept the unconditional apology. The contempt proceedings are accord-
    ings disposed of.

    R.P.                                                   Petitioner disposed of.


Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "contempt of court"Sign in to search

For a digitally signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's own website. Only the court can issue one.