R D RAM Vs. RATAN KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) B. S. Chauhan, J. This special appeal has been filed under the provisions of Chapter VIII, Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952, against the order dated 6. 8. 2007, passed by the learned single Judge in Civil Misc. Contempt Petition No. 3875 of 2005 rejecting the application for recall if its earlier orders dated 2. 3. 2007 and 16. 3. 2007.

(2.) THIS case has a chequered history, as two rounds of litigation have already been completed. The matter has gone upto the Hon'ble Supreme Court twice and in spite of the fact that several orders have been passed by various Courts, the litigation is not coming to an end.

(3.) WHILE entertaining the contempt application, notices were issued vide order dated 14. 12. 2005 giving opportunity to the Collector to ensure compliance of the order passed by this Court on 9th August, 2005. When the matter was listed on 26th September, 2006, this Court held that the order dated 1. 12. 2005 was not satisfactory and once the order of the Authorities under the Act, 1976 had been quashed by this Court observing that the said proceedings stood abated, the applicants/respondents were entitled for compensation for the entire land under the Act, 1894, and the respondent No. 1 did not comply with the order for this Court in its letter and spirit. Thus, he was given one more opportunity to ensure its compliance. The matter had been listed several times. It is evident from the record that various statements had been made before the contempt court that the compensation would be paid under the provisions of the Act, 1894 and for that some time would be given to the State authorities. As the payment was not made, the officers had been directed to remain present in the Court several times but payment has not yet been made, though the contempt court issued several directions fixing the time limit for making the payment and lastly issued direction for making the payment with compound interest @ 10% per annum. Being aggrieved, the appellants filed Special Appeal No. 382 of 2007 challenging the orders passed by the contempt court from time to time. However, the said appeal was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the appellants to file an application for recall of the orders dated 2. 3. 2007 and 16. 3. 2007. (Vide order dated 2. 3. 2007, a direction was issued to make payment with 10 per cent compound interest per annum and in case of non-payment, the District Collector, Principal Secretary (Culture) and the Principal Secretary (Revenue) were directed to remain present, vide order dated 16. 3. 2007 direction was issued to make the entire payment to the applicants before the next date of listing and in case of non-payment, the District Collector, Principal Secretary (Culture) and the Principal Secretary (Revenue) were directed to remain present before the Court. Thereafter, an application to recall the aforesaid two orders was filed, which has been dismissed vide impugned order dated 6th August, 2007. Hence, this special appeal.