This is a single-judge order dismissing a contempt application for non-prosecution. The petitioner consistently failed to appear on three listing occasions. Citing the petitioner's lack of interest, the court dismissed the application without hearing.
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.
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010125082015
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/794/2015
PALLAV KUMAR BARUAH
S/O LT. BHABA KANTA BARUAH R/O AMOLAPATTY, DIPHU P.O. and P.S. DIPHU DIST. KARBI ANGLONG, ASSAM
VERSUS
SMTI. JAYASHREE DAULAGUPU and 2 ORS. I.A.S. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL, DIPHU, DIST. KARBI ANGLONG, ASSAM, PIN - 782460.
2:SRI BIR SINGH INGTI THE DEPUTY SECRETARY TO THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE MEMBER KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL DIPHU DIST. KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM PIN 782460.
3:DR. ANWARUDDIN CHOUDHURY IAS COMMISSIONER and SECRETARY HILLS AREA DEPTT. DISPUR GHY.-06 ASSAM.
4:SRI MAHANANDA HAZARIKA IAS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY OF KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL DIPHU DIST. KARBI ANGLONG ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MSS CHANGKAKATI Advocate for the Respondent : MR J CHUTIYA
Page No.# 2/3
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
ORDER
12-05-2023
There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner today on call.
When the application was listed on the previous two occasions i.e. on 28.11.2022 and 22.03.2023, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner on those two occasions.
The instant contempt application is filed alleging non-compliance of the direction made in the order dated 16.07.2015 passed in the writ petition, WP[C] no. 2214/2015. The writ petition was filed alleging non-disbursal of contractual amount and the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner in terms of the direction made in the case of Tamsher Ali Vs State of Assam, reported in 2008 [4] GLT 1.
Mr. J. Chutia, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 1 i.e. the then Principal Secretary, Karbi-Anglong Autonomous Council [KAAC] by referring to the affidavit-in-opposition, filed on 26.05.2017, has submitted that the total bill amount was of Rs.1,93,95,568/- and out of it, 90% [approx.] of the total bill amount, that is, Rs.1,71,67,607/- was disbursed to the petitioner as far back as in the year 2017. On receipt of the order dated 16.07.2015 of this Court, the respondent authorities disbursed another amount of Rs. 40,000/- to the petitioner. Subsequently, in the year 2016-2017, another amount of Rs. 4,59,375/- was disbursed to the petitioner. Mr. Chutia, learned counsel has submitted that he does not have the subsequent instructions in view of the retirement of the respondent no. 1 on superannuation.
Having regard to the above factual position and considering the fact that the petitioner is consistently absent on three previous occasions, it appears that the petitioner is not interested to pursue the instant application.
Page No.# 3/3
Accordingly, the contempt application is dismissed for non-prosecution.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the contempt application should proceed given the petitioner's consistent non-appearance.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Tamsher Ali Vs State of AssamReferred¶19
Tamsher Ali Vs State of Assam, reported in 2008 [4] GLT 1
PALLAV KUMAR BARUAH
SMTI. JAYASHREE DAULAGUPU AND ORS.
MANISH CHOUDHURY
As recorded by the court registry
Proceedings for wilful disobedience of a court order under the Contempt of Courts Act 1971.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
