RAJENDRA PRASAD OJHA Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondents have finally granted redressal to the petitioners by the order dated 21st November, 2012 which was handed over in court on the last date of hearing.

(2.) WHEN the matter was listed before us on 16 th November, 2012, we had noted the facts giving rise to the present petition and observed as follows:-

(3.) THE Supreme Court has held that if the executive does not follow the well settled law, it shall create confusion in the administration of justice and undermine the law laid down by the court and shall impair its constitutional authority. The disobedience of law laid down by the court shall also amount to contempt of court. These principles would clearly apply to the instant case. In this regard, reference may be made to judicial pronouncements of the Supreme Court reported in (1973) 1 SCC 446, Baradakanta Mishra Ex-Commissioner of Endowments v. Bhimsen Dixit. In this case, the appellant, a member of Judicial Service of State of Orissa refused to follow the decision of the High Court. The High Court issued a notice of contempt to the appellant and thereafter held him guilty of contempt which was challenged before the Honble Supreme Court. The Honble Supreme Court held as under:-