FAYAZ AHMAD BHAT Vs. SRINAGAR MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE courts, while entering upon controversies brought before them, beyond peaceful settlement of disputes, inter alia, create an important bye -product in the shape of trust and confidence amongst general masses in the supremacy of law and the Judicial system. When a person approaches a court of law with a cause or controversy for its adjudication, he submits himself to all the consequences that might follow the cognizance of the matter by the court and he is legally bound to strictly obey all directions passed by the court to the letter of the word, be those of interim or of final nature. He cannot act, behave or proceed, in any manner or to any extent, contrary to the court orders and directions particularly so when such orders and directions are passed at his instance by the court. If he dares to, it would not only constitute an insult to the court and interference with its judicial authority having the ramification of shattering the trust and confidence of general people reposed in the courts, but would also be demonstrative of his ingenuine and insincere motive behind the cause so brought by him and his temerity to mock at the course of justice. Courts themselves have no machinery for enforcement of the decisions so rendered or orders so passed by them, but they are not absolutely armless or powerless. In the event of violation or disobedience of the orders of the court, apart from initiation of contempt, a court would be within its powers to take appropriate measures to secure restoration of the sanctity of its orders. Every order passed by a court, be it an interim, unless reversed, modified or altered by a superior court, has the force of law and constitutes a step forward in the dispensation of justice and resolution of such disputes. It is a cardinal rule that interim directions cannot be beyond the pale of final relief prayed for in a lis and have to merge in the final orders. Therefore, obeyance of such court orders is fundamental and primary to seeking justice. A litigant found wanting in obeyance to such court orders cannot be allowed to derive any advantage or benefit from any kind of infraction moreso when such orders are passed at his instance. When the infraction of the court orders is voluntary, brazen and grave, forcible methods of enforcemnt and restoration of status -quo -ante become imperative and unavoidable. And when the infraction is with respect to the orders of the High Court and the High Court proceeds to set right the wrong committed, no court, forum or authority subject to the supervisory powers of the High Court, shall have the jurisdiction to interfere with or to circumvent the process so initiated by the High Court to restore the sanctity of its orders.

(2.) THIS letters patent appeal is directed against judgement and order dated 17th June 2003 by which, while dismissing three writ petitions, filed almost in quick succession by the appellant, the learned Single Judge has directed the respondents to proceed ahead in accordance with law with the action initiated by them. Sheering off the details irrelevant for our purpose, facts may be noticed.

(3.) VIDE Order No. 08 of 1996 dated 27.04.1996, issued by District Town Planner, Srinagar Municipality the appellant was permitted to restore the first floor a two storeyed building damaged by fire situated at Poloview, Srinagar. He was also permitted to repair the existing two garage blocks adjacent and located in the compound of the aforesaid structure. The aforesaid permission was granted subject to certain conditions and restrictions contained in the sanction order itself. Two of the conditions are quoted hereunder: