BANCHHA RAM CHAKRAWARTI Vs. JHARKHAND STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question is what is meant by disposal of a representation by a reasoned order and in what circumstances, such a disposal will give rise to contempt of Court?

(2.) The question arose out of the fact that in W.P.(S) No. 2035/02, a direction was given to the Opposite Parties by order dated 4-2-2003 (out of which this contempt application arises) that they should dispose of the representation by a reasoned order. The petitioner accordingly filed a representation, which was disposed of having been decided against him. According to the petitioner, this rejection is not based on proper reasonings and consequently, it has been passed only to circumvent the order of the Court and to get rid of any contempt proceeding.

(3.) In many a cases, such orders for disposing a representation by a speaking/reasoned order is given by the Courts. What is meant by speaking/reasoned order requires some deliberation. (1) When a representation is rejected on some grounds, which were pleaded by the opposite parties, when the writ petition was heard and not agreeing with those reasons, the Courts give further direction for passing a reasoned order, then disposing the representation on the same reasons/grounds adding some unsubstantial reasons here and there does not amount to passing a reasoned order as per the direction of the Courts, simply because the same reasonings have been repeated by the opposite parties which have already not been appreciated by the Court, while disposing the writs. In such a situation, the disposal of the representation will tantamount to non-disposal of the representation as the order passed by the opposite parties is aimed to circumvent the contempt proceeding. (2) The second case may be that when new reasonings are given, but apparently they are fallacious and not sustainable, then also disposal of such a representation in such a manner will give rise to the aforesaid consequences. (3) The third case may be that the reasonings given are substantial and cannot be dispelled prima facie, then in such a circumstances, the order is reasonable and acceptable and does not invite any contempt proceeding.