Appeal against an order passed under Article 215 and the Contempt of Courts Act during the subsistence of a substantive order. The High Court held the impugned order was for implementation and did not exceed the substantive order's scope.
Provisions of Article 215 of the Constitution of India and the Contempt of Courts Act, 1972.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ]
…
MAT/4/2021 In IA No.CAN/1/2021
The Lieutenant Governor and others
… Appellants
Vs.
Hotel Seashell & another … Respondents
Mr.S.Chakraborty, Mr. Ramendu Agarwal, Advocates … for the appellants Mrs.Anjili Nag, Advocate …for the respondents
December 17, 2021 [GNC] Item No.4
MAT/4/2021 is directed against the order dated November 22, 2021 passed in CPAN/16/2021.
Learned advocate appearing for the appellants submits that by the impugned order, the learned Single Judge gave directions which were beyond the orders sought to be implemented in the contempt petition.
The order sought to be implemented in the contempt petition is dated August 31, 2021.
By the impugned order, the learned Judge exercising jurisdiction under Article 215 of the Constitution of India and the Contempt of Courts Act, 1972, directed the writ petitioners to continue to pay the demand raised on the basis of number of units at the industrial rate. Learned Single Judge also directed the appellants to communicate the outstanding dues to the writ petitioners at the industrial rate within a period of seven days from the date of the order. Learned Single Judge provided that payment made by the writ petitioners and the acceptance of the amount by the appellants shall be strictly without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties. Learned Single Judge
2
also observed that the writ petitioner shall continue to pay the industrial rate as directed during the subsistence of the order and the consequences of default shall also apply.
A court exercising jurisdiction under Article 215 of the Constitution of India and the Contempt of Courts Act, 1972 can pass orders for implementation of the order violation of which was being complained of. In the facts of the present case on the date of the impugned order subsisted the order dated August 31, 2021 relevant portion of which is as follows:-
“The writ petitioners shall pay the respondents against the number of units consumed after December 2, 2020 as per the bills raised, only as per the industrial rate described and not the commercial rate.
Upon payment of the said amount within a period of one month from date, the respondents shall not disconnect the electricity line of the petitioners.
Needless to mention that the payment by the writ petitioners at the industrial rate and any claim that the respondents may have against the writ petitioners, shall abide by the result of any appeal that the respondents may prefer against the order dated December 2, 2020 and the order passed in Review dated August 23,2021.”
We are of the view that the order dated November 22, 2021
passed by the learned Single Judge in the contempt petition was for the purpose of implementation of the order dated August 31, 2021, and that His Lordship did not exceed the order dated August 31, 2021 in passing the impugned order.
We find no infirmity with the impugned order.
MAT/4/2021 and CAN/1/2021 are dismissed without any order as to costs.
(Debangsu Basak, J. )
(Jay Sengupta, J. )
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the order passed by the Single Judge in contempt proceedings exceeded the scope of the substantive order sought to be implemented.
The Lieutenant Governor and others
Hotel Seashell & another
Debangsu Basak
Jay Sengupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
