9911796707
TMI Blog1977 (8) TMI 180X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respondent herein (Secretary to the Government, Revenue Department) through their advocate drawing his attention to the noncompliance with the order of the Court and Specifying tentatively the amount due to each petitioner and requesting him to move the State Government to issue necessary orders at an early date. The letter was admittedly received but it was not even acknowledged. A reminder was thereafter sent by the petitioners through their advocates on November 11, 1976 and it again met with the same fate. The petitioners then addressed another letter through their advocates on February 9, 1977 to the second respondent (annexing thereto a copy of the earlier letter dated July 22, 1976) and requesting him to direct payment of arrears within a week of the receipt of the letter and advising him that in case no action was taken, they would be compelled to institute contempt proceedings in this Court for the disobedience of its orders. To this communication an undated and unsigned reply was received by the advocates of the petitioners advising that Government have already issued the orders for payment of arrears etc. arising out of the decision of the High Court in Special Civil Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7 directing inter alia that special pay at ₹ 100/- per month should be continued in respect of the concerned officers and that the arrears be paid to them for the period they continued to hold the posts in the concerned cadres. The Resolution proceeded to state that the Accountant General, Rajkot and the pay and Accounts Officer, Ahmedabad should authorize payment of arrears to those of the officers who had been allocated in the concerned cadres under their respective payment control during the time that they continued to hold the posts in the said cadres; (7) The petitioners were since issued authorizations letters by the Accountant General, Rajkot and they would be able to draw the amount to which they were entitled; (8) Long delay was caused because the exact amount payable to each petitioner was not ascertainable. 6. When the matter reached hearing on August 26, 1977 the petitioners complained that all of them had still not received the authorization slips from the Accountant General, Rajkot and that only some of them had received actual payment The further complaint was that even in the case of those of the petitioners who had received the slips or payment, full ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asked to furnish the particulars of clears payable to the petitioners; (6) The Government was finally advised by the Legal Department on June 16, 1976 that this was not a fit case in which appeal was required to be filed and the Government must be taken to have acquiesced in the decision of this Court atleast as from and with effect from the said date; (7) The Settlement Commissioner and the Director of Land Records took a long time and after reminders were sent to him, he ultimately informed the Government on October 25, 1976 that he was not in a position to furnish the particulars; .(8) The Financial Adviser then cleared the proposal on December 24, 1976 directing that general authorizations orders be issued; (9) In the meantime the petitioners wrote two letters to the second respondent on July 22, 1976 and November 11, 1976 through their advocate. In the first letter, the petitioners furnished tentative figures of the arrears to which they had become entitled tinder the order of this Court. No reply was sent to either of these communications. They were not even acknowledged; (10) On January 13, 1977 the Government passed the resolution giving general authorization orders for pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss disregard of consequences and mala fides stand equal, where the actual state of mind of the actor is relevant (see Municipality of Bhiwandi and Nizampure v. M/s. Kailash Sizing Works [1975]2SCR123 . If, therefore, the attention of the contemners has been drawn to the fact that time bound orders of the Court were not carried out and' that as a result thereof the contempt petitioner was denied the benefit of the just relief granted to him by the Court and still they do riot make further inquiry and even when they are warned of the consequences of contempt, they still persist in disregarding the order of the Court and in failing to implement it faithfully in reckless disregard of such consequences the conclusion as to wilful disregard can justly be drawn. 10. In the present case, on the facts stated above, it was easy for us to reach a conclusion on the question whether there is wilful disregard, disregard being an admitted and proved fact. There is enough material to reach adjust conclusion. We are, however, not entering into that field in view of the unconditional and unqualified apology tendered by the second respondent on behalf of the respondents and also in view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
