Mahant Romesh Giri vs Bharat Bhushan Vyas and Ors.

Through the medium of this petition, the petitioner, namely, mahant Romesh Giri has sought initiation of contempt proceedings against the

respondants for the wilful voilation of the Court order dated December 09, 1991 passed in CMP No. 695/91 of appeal No. 156/91.

Furthermore, breach of the order dated 26101991 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Reasi(in case Civil Misc. No. 9 of 1991 titled

Mahant Romesh Giri V/s Sh. Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Board and Others) is also alleged (hereinafter referred as Shrine Board).

The relevant facts shorn of its unessentials are that the petitional herein on January 18, 1991 entered into a registered agreement with Shri Mata

Vaishno Devi Shrine Board, Katra(through its Chief Executive Officer) wherein he had agreed to act as Poojan of the Shiv Mandir known as

Shivkhori Cave"" and the Shrine Board in lieu of these services had to pay him a consolidated remuneration of Rs. 2500/ permonth The Shrine

Board was authorised to raise permanent and temporary structures (such as shops, khokhas and sheds etc.) over the cave land and its

appurtenance. The petitioner herein acted for sometime on the terms and conditionsof the agreement but made a complete volte face when on

August 23,1991 filed Civil Suit in the court of learned Additional District Judge, Reasi. Civil Misc. Petition No. 9 of 1991 is an offshoot of that

Civil Suit wherein relief for the grant of temporary injuction was claimed. The learned Trial Judge after hearing the counsel for the parties, granted

temporary relief to the extent that the petitioner therein was allowed to perform the religious duties of the Pooja The said order of the learned

Additional District Judge, reasi was challenged in civil 1st Appeal No. 156/91 titled Mahant Ramesh Giri V/s Shri mala Vaishno Devi Shrine

Board and others. During the pendency of the appeal, on December 9, 1991 exparte order (annexure P2) waspassed whereby respondent therein

namely (1) Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Board, Katra(through its Civil Executive Officer) and (2) the Additional Chief Executive Officer; Shri

mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Board were directed not to make any alteration in the structure of the holy cave of Shivkhori. The order was conditional

i.e., subject to the filling of objection by the other side. Subsequently, the above said Civil 1st Appeal No. 156/91 was dismissed on November

21, 1994 and direction was issued to the respondents therein to maintain and keep an account of the income as well as expendature of the temple

in question, till the final disposal of the suit in the Trial Court i.e before the learned Additional District Judge, Reasi.

The allegation levelled in this petition against the respondants are that they without caring for the orders of this court, on March 1,1992 collected

in the cave premises and threatened the petitioner herein to withdraw his suit from the Court of the learned Additional District Judge. Reasi as well

as the appeal from this Court. Respondent No.1 anmely, Mr. B.B. Vyas then the Additional Executive Officer. Shri mala Vaishno Devi Shrine

Board, katra openly decleared that he had never cared for such orders of the Courts. That he had been vested with more power than the powers

of the High Court and would call the Judge at the site of the cave as well as in the town of the Katra. The Judges have to succumb to the executive

force of the Government. After making such utterances he procured the help of some antisocial elements and got constructed sheds over the land

of the cave. The respondents had also interfered with the performance of the Pooja ceremonies

Respondents No.1 and 2 have filed the objections and denied the allegations. They have pleaded that they are the members of the Indian

Administrative Services and they held the charges of responsible posts under the Government. Presently, Respondent No.1 of the District

Magistrate of Srinagar and respondent No. 2 was transferred from SubDivisional magistrate, Reasi to Additional Secretary, Public works

Department and thereafter District Magistrate, Budgam. Respondent No.1 has denied that he made any derogatory remarks against the

Honourable Judges. Both of them have pleaded that they have highest regard for the Judges, the law courts and are obedient to the rule of law.

According to them, the present petitioner has been fieled in order to harass and pressurise them so that the civil suit is not persued and the

petitioner may be relegated to his original position. After their transfers to the present posts, they have not even casual connection with the affairs of

the Shrine Board of with the management of the cave and no question arises for overacting or doing any unwanted act.

Heard the arguments of the counsel.

Mr. J.R. Arora has urged that respondent may be awarded exemplary punishment as they were hell bent on seeing the directions of the court

being flouted. They succeeded in their nafarious designs by the use of muscle power. Antisocial elements were called on the sacred spot and by

hurling threats and tantrums the petitioner was cowed, hamstung in spirits and ultimately subdued. The abrasive conduct of the respondent No.1

who brazenly were filthy and foul language in his threats were contemptuous. The aspersions made by him aganst the Judges had the effect of

scandalising the courts in such a way as to creat distrust in the peoples' mind and impair their confidence in the law courts.

The counsel appearing for the respondents have vehementaly denied the factual allegations Respondent No.1 and 2 in their objections have

pleaded that the accusation are imaginary, whimsical and purposely employed with a view to prejudice the mind of the court and browbeat the

respondents. It is pleaded that the pitching of tents on the eve of Shivratri's Festival(on March 1, 1992) was not an act of any altration of the

structures on the spot.

In order to lend corroboration to the averments of the petition, the petitioner has placed on record some photographs, which show few

temporary structures nearby the cave. The affidavits of M/s Sat Pal Khajuria S/o Des Raj Khajuria R/o Reasi, Naresh Kumar S/o Charn Das R/o

Reasi, Parshotam Kumar S/o Jeevan Das R/o Reasi, Sunil Dutt S/o Mohan Lai R/o Reasi and Krishan Kumar S/o Amar Nath R/o Reasi have also

produced by him. All the deponents have deposited the respondents had interfered with the performance of Pooja; raised temporary structure as

well as used derogatory remarks against the Judges.

The record reveals that the order in question(annexure P2 dated December 9,1991) was passed exparte as at that time, the appeal had not yet

been admitted. The order reads as under :

Issue notice,returnable within three weeks. Till then, no alterations shall be made in the structure of the holy cave of Shivkhori situated at Singh

Garh, Reasi and its building structures.

In other words, the order has been found not absolute but subject to the objections of the other side. Now, it has to be seen what was the effect of

such an order ? The apex court in the case of State of J&K v. Mohd. Yaqoob Khan (Civil Appeal No. 3472 of 1992 decided on 26081992) has

held that the scope of a contempt preoceeding is very different from that of pending main case, yet to be heard and disposed of in future. The

respondantsin a pending case are at a disadvantage if they are called upon to meet the merits of the claim in a contempt proceeding at the risk of

being punished. Here, the High Court had asked the state to implement the interim direction issued on March 19,1991 in the light of the

Commissioners report. In Appeal it was held that an order in the nature of mandatory direction could not have been justified unless the court was

in position to consider the objections and record a finding primafacie in nature, in favour of the writ petitioner. The respondantwas entitled to raise

a plea of nonmaintainability of a writ application.

In these circumstances, the orders passed in the contempt proceeding were not justified, being premature and were ignored. In the instant case,

the order had to be confirmed or vacated after hearing the other side. It is further found from the record that the main case i.e. Appeal No. 156/91

was ultimately found meriless and dismissed on November 21,1994. The petitioner herein has failed to establish that the order (annexure P2) was

passed after admitting the appeal. The Apex Court in the case of union of India and Others V/s Daya Ram (Order passed on April 18, 1996 in

Civil Appeal No 7409 of 1996 arising. out of SLP(c) No. 4678 of 96) had held that orders passed directing the respondents to a writ petitioner to

do certain things without admitting the petition, could not be said to have been passed in any proceedings. The order seemed to have been passed

at a stage when the appeal was not yet admitted and it was not enforceable under law. When viewed from the ratio decidendi of the

order(annexure P2) are found not enforceable.

Be that as it may, the factual matrix of the case is also not in favour of the petitioner. The alleged pitching of the tents in temporary manner to

accommodate the influx of pilgrims on the auspicious day of ShivRatri (on 01031992) cannot be held by any stretch of the imagination as an

alteration of the structures. There is no specific allegation as to which structure was altered and in what manner. The depositions made on the oath

in the affidavits of dependents Sat Pal, Des Raj, Naresh Kumar, Parshotam Kumar, Sunil Dutt and Krishan Kumar regarding the alleged change in

structure at the material time as well depriving the petitioner to perform the Pooja are of vague nature. Such parrot like utterances can easily be

procured from some persons who are of easy virtues. The antecedents and the credibility of these dependents are not known and it is not safe to

reley on their averments which can have serious affects an the service careers of the respondents No.1 and 2 had no personal axes to grind with

the petitioner when they raised temporary accommodation to provide shelter to the pilgrims. Rather, their conduct was gregracious, gracious and

gratuitous. Veiled threats, abrasivr behaviour, use of disresceptful language and at times blatant condemnatory attacks like the persent are

sometimes designedly employed with a view to secure the desired results . The petitioner herein has been found to have played such machiavellian

game in order to secure his ends There was no occasion for the respondents and especially respondent No.1 (Who are all responsible public

servants) to use contemptuous language and make scurrilous attacks on Judges in full view of the public because responsible public servants are

not addicted to such irresponsible behaviour and. they are conscious of the consequences which ensure of such like acts.

Viewing the case from all the aspects, it is found that the present petition has been found to be made with ulterior motive which had the

tendentious effect of lowering the dignity of the legal system By leveling reckless and maligning accusations, the petitioner herein has abused the

process of the Court. Respondents No.1 and 2 who had been occupying responsible posts for maintaining law and order in their respective

Districts in the Kashmir Valley had to sometime attend these proceeding not only on mental and physical harassment but burdened with financial

constrains. They deserve to be compensated for facing such frivolous litigation. In the result, the petition is dismissed with cost of rupees three

thousand payable by the petitioner within one month, which shall be paid to respondent No.1 and 2 in equal shares.