HARI RAJ KISHORE Vs. SHIV PRASAD DUBEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SUDHIR Agarwal, J. This is an appeal under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act read with Chapter VIII, Rule 5 of the Rules of the Court, against the order/judgments of the Hon'ble Single Judge dated 17-12-2002 and 13-1- 2003 passed in the Contempt Petition No. 2613 of 2002.

(2.) WE have heard Sri Arjun Singhal, learned Counsel for the appellant. None is present on behalf of the respondents, although name of Shiv Prasad Pandey, in person, is shown in the cause list. From the order sheet also it appears that this matter was listed on 22-12-2004, when also Sri Shiv Prasad Pandey did not appear, despite his name shown in the cause list. Today also he is not present. WE however, proceed to hear and decide this matter even in the absence of Shiv Prasad Pandey.

(3.) IT appears that the copy of the representation was submitted by the petitioner-respondent to the Commissioner, Mirzapur on 14- 10-2002 whereupon he directed an enquiry to be made on various issues raised in the representation. Consequently an enquiry was conducted by the Deputy Development Commissioner, Vindhyachal Division. IT is stated that during the enquiry the petitioner- respondent was present and briefed the Deputy Development Commissioner, Vindhyachal on all aspects of the matter. Spot inspection was also made. Thereafter the Commissioner passed a detailed order on 5-1-2003 considering various issues raised by the petitioner-respondent in his representation. All these facts were stated by the appellant in the affidavit filed before the Hon'ble Single Judge after receipt of notice. However, the Hon'ble Single Judge in his order dated 13-1-2003 has proceeded to consider various other aspects of the matter which in our view, are beyond the jurisdiction of the Contempt Court since the Court in Contempt jurisdiction has to consider only whether the direction or judgment of the Court passed in regular proceeding has been complied with or not. IT cannot go beyond the directions contained in the order, disobedience whereof is complained. Whether the authority rightly passed the order pursuant to the order passed by the Court or procedure adopted is correct is not the matter to be seen by the Court dealing with contempt matter. For that purpose, it is open to the aggrieved person to approach the Court in regular proceedings by filing a fresh writ petition etc.