9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (3) TMI 391X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ports or the Deputy Chief Controller of Imports and Exports could be said to have committed any contempt of court, even prima facie, by their mere failure to take action in the matter of the disposal of the applications of the writ petitions. In the circumstances, we perceive the application to commit the authorities for contempt of courts to be a device to exact licences from them. We accordingly allow the appeal, vacate the interim order dated November 22, 1983 of the Calcutta High Court - Special Leave Petition (civil) No. 3746 of 1984 - - - Dated:- 27-3-1984 - O. Chinnappa Reddy, A.P. Sen and E.S. Venkataramiah, JJ. Shri Milan Bannerjee, Addl. Solicitor General, for the Petitioners. Shri Soli Sorabjee, Senior Advocate, f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spect of a consignment of beef tallow which has arrived at the Calcutta Port. An inevitable result of the filing of Writ Petitions elsewhere than at the place where the concerned offices and the relevant records are located in a delay prompt return and contest. We do not desire to probe further into the question whether the writ petition was filed by design or accident in the Calcutta High Court when the office of the company is in the state of Punjab and all the principal respondents are in Delhi. But we do feel disturbed that such writ petitions are deliberately filed in distant High Courts, as part of a manoeuvre in legal battle, so as to render it difficult for the officials at Delhi to move applications to vacate stay where it becomes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll the disposal of the rule ; (i)-Mandatory orders directing the respondent No. 5 Collector of Customs to permit the petitioners to re-export the consignment of inedible Beef Tallow in terms of I.T.C. Public Notice No. 37 of 1983 dated 1-9-1983 with respect to the consignment weighing 456.316 MT which is lying at Calcutta under Section 49 of the Customs Act ; (n)-An order that pending the hearing and final disposal of this Writ Petition the petitioners be permitted to re-ship and/or re-export the consignment of 456.215 MT of inedible Beef Tallow which arrived at Calcutta as mere particularly mentioned in Annexure I . 5. It is obvious that the interim order is of a drastic character with a great potential for mischief. The princip ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t returnable within a short period. This should particularly be so where the offices of the principal respondents and relevant records lie outside the ordinary jurisdiction of the Court. To grant interim relief straightaway and leave it to the respondents to move the court to vacate the interim order may jeopardise the public interest. It is notorious how if an interim order is once made by a court, parties employ every device and tactics to ward off the final hearing of the application. It is, therefore, necessary for the courts to be circumspect in the matter of granting interim relief, more particularly so where the interim relief is directed against orders or actions of public officials acting in discharge of their public duty and in ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ller of Imports and Exports and others for contempt of court was filed by the company. Notice to the respondents was ordered on the same day and on February 3, 1984, overruling the request made on behalf of the respondents that the petition to vacate the interim order may be heard first, the High Court issued a rule in the application for contempt of court against the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports and Deputy Chief Controller of imports and Exports and directed them to appear in person on March 6, 1984. Thereupon the Union of India, the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, etc. have filed the present special leave petition against the interim order dated November 22, 1983 of the Calcutta High Court in Civil Rule No. 10933 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rd to the elaborate arguments addressed to us by both parties. The complaint of the writ petitioners in seeking the rule for contempt of court was that the authorities had not dealt with their applications for licences, etc. despite the abeyance order having been stayed. It is obvious that the stay of the operation of the abeyance order merely meant that the writ petitioners were entitled to have their applications disposed of by the concerned authorities. The High Court not having set any limit of time for the disposal of the applications, it was not for the writ petitioners to impose a time-limit and demand that their applications should be disposed of forthwith. If the writ petitioners were aggrieved by the failure of their authoriti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
