AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
10 paragraphs · 338 wordsMA No. 266/2020 in C. A. No. 6328-6399 of 2015 [ITEM NO. 301]
M.A.D.NO. 303 OF 2020 [ITEM NO. 301.1]
MA NO. 339-410/2020 IN C. A. NO. 6328-6399 OF 2015 [ITEM NO.301.9]
MA.NO. 267-338/2020 IN C. A. NO. 6328-6399 OF 2015 [ITEM NO. 301.8]
The learned senior counsel appearing for the applicants seek leave to withdraw these misc. applications with liberty to avail appropriate remedy before appropriate forum in accordance with law, in case necessity arises.
With the above liberty, the misc. applications are disposed of as withdrawn.
This case projects a very disturbing scenario. The companies have violated the order passed by this Court in pith and substance. In spite of the dismissal of the Review application, they have not deposited any amount so far. It appears the way in which things are happening that they have scant respect to the directions issued by this court. A Desk Officer of the Department of Telecommunications has the temerity to pass the order to the effect of issuing a direction to the Accountant General, another Constitutional Authority, "not to insist for any payment pursuant to the order passed by this Court and not to take any coercive steps till further orders." This is nothing but a device to scuttle order of this Court. This kind of order should not have been passed by the Desk Officer at all.
In the circumstances, we draw contempt proceedings against the Desk Officer for passing the order and violating the order passed by this Court. The Managing Directors/Directors of the companies also to show cause why we should not initiate contempt proceedings against them for violating the order passed by this Court by not depositing the amount, on the next date of hearing. Let the concerned Officer, sitting over the order passed by this Court, also file reply.
It is made clear that in case the order passed by this Court is not complied with, the above persons shall remain personally present in Court on the next date of hearing.
List on 17.03.2020.