Chand Pasha vs K.S. Krishna Reddy & Others

Abhay S. Oka, CJ

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the complainant. The second accused is present through video conferencing. The learned Additional

Government Advocate represents the first and second accused as well as the third respondent.

The order of breach is alleged has been passed on 12th July 2018 in a writ petition filed by the complainant. The grievance of the complainant was

that he was entitled to the leave on medical grounds for the period between 17th July 2005 to 27th August 2007. By the said order, this Court

permitted the complainant to make a representation to the second accused enclosing therewith the copies of the earlier representations. A direction

was issued to take a decision within a period of three months from the date on which the representation was submitted.

Annexure-B to the contempt petition is a reminder dated 27th January 2021 submitted by the complainant to the first accused. It refers to the

representations made by him on 21st July 2018, 30th October 2018, 24th September 2019 and 11th December 2019. Thus, in terms of the order dated

12th July 2018, the earlier representation dated 21st July 2018 was required to be decided within a period of three months from 21st July 2018.

The present contempt petition was filed on 16th March 2021. On 22nd March 2021, this Court directed the complainant to serve a copy of the

petition along with the annexures to the office of the learned Advocate General. As there was no response, on 16th April 2021, notice of the contempt

petition was ordered to be issued to the second accused. It is only thereafter, as late as on 3rd July 2021, an order has been passed as per the

directions of this Court dated 19th July 2018.

The perusal of the compliance affidavit shows that it contains no explanation for such a gross delay of more than two and half years. An

explanation is purportedly offered in paragraph 5 of the said affidavit by stating that the complainant was deputed to the Town Municipal Council,

Jigani, Anekal Taluk and was not working in the concerned department. The Chief Engineer, who appears through video conferencing contended that

the necessary documents were not received by the department. This is hardly an explanation for such a long delay of more than two and half years.

Moreover, from 21st July 2018 till 11th December 2019, four representations were made by the complainant. Before filing the contempt petition, the

representation dated 27th January 2021 was submitted by the complainant. Even thereafter, more than five months have been taken to comply with

the order of this Court.

Though, in view of the belated compliance, further proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 cannot be initiated, the State Government

will have be saddled with costs quantified at Rs.25,000/-.

Accordingly, we pass the following order:

(i) The contempt petition is disposed of subject to the condition of the third respondent paying costs quantified at Rs.25,000/- to the complainant within

a period of one month from today;

(ii) It will be open for the third respondent to recover the said amount from the officers who are responsible for the delay;

(iii) If the complainant aggrieved by the order dated 3rd July 2021, he can always adopt appropriate proceedings in accordance with law;

(iv) Though the petition is disposed of, for reporting compliance with the order of payment of costs, the petition shall be listed on 16th August 2021.