BALAI KRUSHNA TEJ Vs. INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Court is being required to spend quite a bit of its time in deciding whether contempt has been committed by public officials or not. Devotion of this time is towards non-productive work, but the same is necessary inasmuch as if the fruits obtained after devoting much time, money and energy are not allowed to be reaped by the successful parties, their approach to this Court to take action under the Contempt of Courts Act against the erring officials is well justified. Most of the cases coming to this Court on the aforesaid count relate to non-implementation of the order within the time fixed by the court. As there have been a large number of allegations on this count and as the Court is being required to spend its valuable time to adjudicate such types of grievances and as it would be in the larger interest of justice if this work is avoided, time has come to say something on the implementation of the order by public officials within the time-frame fixed by the court and to take a serious note of the lapses in this regard.

(2.) As is known, time is fixed in almost all cases to implement the order with the consent of the counsel appearing for the parties. In such a situation, if the parties concerned find it difficult for one good reason or the other to implement the order within the time visualised in the court's order, we think it is obligatory on the part of such a party to approach the court for extension of time instead of taking the attitude of violating the order and then trying to implement the order after a contempt petition is filed. Such an attitude on the part of the public officials does not speak well and such erring officials do not show due regard to the court's order for which appropriate punishment has to be awarded on them to avoid the avoidable litigation and unnecessary consumption of the time of the court in adjudication of such disputes when the court's docket is too heavy and the court's time is required to adjudicate disputes which are pending before it for a long time. Besides, non-implementation of court's direction/ order within the time stipulated by erring officials leaves an imprint in the minds of the litigants that judicial orders are ineffective which undermines the entire judiciary in the estimation of the public. In case it continues unabated and unless a cry of halt is given with painful necessity of punishing the delinquent, the entire judicial system will fall in disrepute.

(3.) In the present case, the petitioner had challenged his order of suspension dated 30-8-1980 which was set aside by this Court on 16-3-1989 stating, inter alia, as below :-