.jpeg)
NEW DELHI, May 29: A Bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Dipankar Datta in Apex Court while hearing a SLP filed by the Union Territory administration challenging two orders of the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court, one passed by a Single Judge and another by a Division Bench has strongly criticized the conduct of Jammu and Kashmir administration officials for bypassing procedural norms in a contempt matter arising from the non-compliance of a High Court order related to contractor payments.
The controversy stemmed from the High Court’s direction to the administration to consider making admitted payments to plant suppliers within two months, but as usual JKUT bosses did not bothered to act.
Thereafter, the aggrieved contractors initiated contempt proceedings before the High Court but again as usual for causing litigation charges on Govt Expenses instead of appearing before the Single Judge to explain their stance whether the payments had been made or were not legally due, the UT administration filed an intra-court appeal before the Division Bench, which was subsequently dismissed & thereafter, SLP was filed in Supreme Court.
questioning, this approach of Govt Bosses, Justice Surya Kant remarked that “Sometimes bureaucrats have arrogance, they don’t want to go before High Courts.”
Court added that in our considered opinion, it is the bounden duty of the petitioners to explain to the Single Judge before whom the contempt proceeding is pending that the respondents have either been paid their due amount or they are not entitled to such payment.
The Bench openly clarified that once the authorities provide a satisfactory explanation, it is for the High Court to assess the merits of the petitioners’ defense and proceed according to law.
Supreme Court added that any such inquiry must be within legal bounds and limited to individual claims & Justice Dipankar Datta said that the concerned officer has been asked to attend virtually. He can explain it to the court if his counsel is not in a position to explain. You should not have gone for a Division Bench appeal. Nobody has yet held that you are in contempt.
The court concluded that if any punishment is ultimately imposed by the single Judge, the affected officer retains the right to appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court. This sharp judicial rebuke by the Supreme Court said that the Government officers must engage sincerely with judicial processes and avoid using appeals as a tool to evade accountability.
|