Dismissed

Madan Mohan Routray v. Chithra Arumugam

Orissa HC3 Nov 2020CONTC/515/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court addressed a contempt petition regarding delay in compliance with earlier directions involving the School & Mass Education Department. The Court accepted an unconditional apology for the delay, dropped the contempt proceeding, and cautioned the Department to comply with future directions.

What did the court decide?

The contempt proceeding is dropped; the petitioner benefits from the release of the amount involved.

Madan Mohan Routray Vs Chithra Arumugam — Contempt of Court | Orissa HC (2020)

¶1

CONTC NO.515 OF 2020

¶2

4 3.11.2020 This matter is taken up through Video Conferencing.

¶3

Heard Sri M.Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.Parida, learned Standing Counsel for the School & Mass Education Department appearing for the contemnor.

¶4

Pursuant to the notice of this Court dated 21.10.2020, Sri Satyabrata Sahu, Principal Secretary to Government, School & Mass Education Department volunteers to appear in person. Through the compliance affidavit, Sri Sahu while admitting the delay in complying with the direction of this Court dated 9.4.2019 involving W.P.(C) No.15729 of 2011 as well as direction dated 25.10.2019 involving CONTC No.515 of 2020 begs unconditional apology and makes it clear that the amount involving the direction of this Court has already been released in favour of the petitioner. Sri Sahu also undertakes that he will look into the delay aspect and to be serious in such matter henceforth and will attempt to work out the direction of this Court to avoid filing of contempt petitions.

¶5

Learned counsel for the parties agree with the statement of the contemnor-opposite party and submit that the petitioner is already in receipt of the entire benefit following the order dated 9.4.2019 involving W.P.(C) No.15729 of 2011.

¶6

¶7

This Court though finds, there is unnecessary and unwanted delay and at no point of time, there is even no showing of minimum courtesy on the part of the School & Mass Education Department at least filing an application in the writ petition seeking extension of time in the event there

¶8

¶9

was difficulty in complying with the order in time, though taking this to be a casual approach towards Court, however, accepts the unconditional apology as well as the fact that Sri Sahu has joined the post very recently and the inaction mostly attributable to Chithra Arumugam, the exCommissioner-cum-Secretary, who in the meantime has already been relieved from the post, this Court while dropping the contempt proceeding hopes and trusts, the concerned Department will remain careful and will comply with the direction of this Court having no legal impediment by way of stay order from high forum within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶10

Personal appearance of the Officer is dispensed with.

¶11

The petitioner may utilise the soft copy of this order available in the High Court’s website or print out thereof at par with certified copy in the manner prescribed, vide Court’s Notification No.4587 dated 25.3.2020.

¶12

…………………………

¶13

Biswanath Rath, J.

¶14

Madan Mohan Routray v. Chithra Arumugam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madan Mohan Routray v. Chithra Arumugam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Budheswar Bal Vs State

Chandrama Joshi Vs State

Mahendra Prasad Dwivedi Vs Chithra Arumugam, I.A.S.

Sukanta Kumar Mahapatra Vs State of Odisha

Susanta Kumar Dalai Vs State of Odisha

Anupama Naik Vs State of Odisha