Disposed

M/S. Acrux Realcon Pvt.Ltd v. Pradeep Kumar Sahu

Orissa HC13 Apr 2021CONTC/1300/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this contempt petition challenging the opposite party's delay in disposing of mutation cases, the court observed that despite procedural irregularities and late disposal, the case was disposed of within the stipulated timeframe following its direction. Consequently, the court dropped the contempt proceeding without assessing guilt for deliberate violation.

What did the court decide?

The contempt proceeding against the opposite party is dropped.

M/S. Acrux Realcon Pvt.Ltd Vs Pradeep Kumar Sahu — Contempt of Court | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

CONTC No.1300 of 2021

¶2

13.04.2021 This matter is taken up through video conferencing mode.

¶3

Heard Mr. S.K. Ojha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Miss Samapika Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State.

¶4

The petitioner in this contempt petition prays for initiation of a proceeding under the provisions of the Contempt of Court’s Act, 1971 and to punish the opposite party, namely, Sri Pradeep Kumar Sahoo, Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar for willful and deliberate violation of this Court’s orders dated 14.09.2020 as well as 09.10.2020 passed in W.P.(C) No.23030 of 2020 and in I.A. No.10831 of 2020 respectively as well as direction issued vide order dated 05.01.2021 in CONTC No.6264 of 2020.

¶5

Mr. Ojha, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had filed W.P.(C) No.23030 of 2020, which was disposed of vide order dated 14.09.2020 with the following order:

¶6

“This matter is taken up through Video conferencing.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State Counsel.

¶8

Considering the limited request for disposal of Mutation Case Nos.6955, 6956, 3957, 6958, 6959, 6950 and 6961 of 2020 pending before the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar, this writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswaropposite party no.3 to dispose of the aforesaid Mutation Case in accordance with law and also taking into account the applicability of the decision referred to at Annexure-1 after normal functioning of the office work.”

¶9

-2-

¶10

The said order was further clarified vide order dated 09.10.2020 passed in I.A. No.10831 of 2020 with the following order:

¶11

“This matter is taken up through Video Conferencing.

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶13

There being an inadvertent omission of time stipulation for disposal of the Mutation Cases, this Court directs O.P.3 to comply with this Court’s order dated 14.9.2020 within a period of two months from the date of normal functioning of the Office of the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar. The I.A. stands disposed of accordingly.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner may utilize 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 25.03.2020.”

¶15

Accordingly, the petitioner communicated the said order timely to the opposite party. It is his submission that the State Government disputing the title of the petitioner over the land in question had moved the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP(Civil) Diary No.20294 of 2020. The said SLP was, however, dismissed vide order dated 27.11.2020. As such, there was no legal impediment on the part of the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar to comply with the order passed by this Court within the stipulated time, i.e. two months from the date of normal functioning of the said court. Since the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar did not comply with the said order within the time stipulated, the petitioner moved this Court in CONTC 6264 of 2020, which was disposed of vide order dated 05.01.2021 with a direction that in the event the

¶16

-3-

¶17

order of this Court is not worked out within a period of one month from the date of the said order, it would be construed to be deliberate violation of the order of this Court. Upon receipt of the said order, the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar hastily disposed of Mutation Case No.6959 of 2020 by putting a back date, i.e. on 05.11.2020. From the copy of the order sheet of Mutation Case No.6959 of 2020 as at Annexure-3 series, it would be apparent that the Additional Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar has disposed of the said mutation case in a most irregular manner without following due procedure of law. Although the mutation cases were disposed of vide order dated 05.11.2020, it was not communicated to the petitioner forthwith.

¶18

In view of the above, it is submitted by Mr. Ojha, learned counsel for the petitioner that it is a deliberate attempt to sit over and frustrate the direction of this Court. As such, the opposite party is liable to be held guilty for contempt of this Court and be suitably punished.

¶19

Miss Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that irregularity or illegality in the orders passed in mutation cases as at Annexure-A/3 series to the show cause notice, can be examined by the competent authority by filing proper application/appeal. The same cannot be adjudicated in a contempt application. She further submits that there is no provision under the Orissa

¶20

-4-

¶21

Survey & Settlement Act or Rules framed thereunder to communicate the order passed in mutation case to the parties concerned. It is for the petitioner to get a copy of the said order from the office of the concerned Tahasidar. She, however, submits that there are some delay in disposing of the mutation cases due to pendency of SLP(Civil) Diary No.20294 of 2020, which has already been dismissed vide order dated 27.11.2020. However, pursuant to the direction of this Court in CONTC No.6264 of 2020, the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar disposed of the mutation cases vide order dated 05.11.2020, which was in time. Hence, she prays for dropping of the contempt proceeding.

¶22

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. Although the show cause filed by Sri Pradeep Kumar SahooTahasildar, Bhubaneswar is not suitably worded and the grounds taken are not clear, but taking into consideration that the mutation cases have been disposed of the vide order dated 05.11.2020 pursuant to the direction of this Court in CONTC No.6264 of 2020, this Court without proceeding further in this contempt proceeding, feels it proper to drop the same.

¶23

Accordingly, the contempt proceeding is dropped. It is, however, observed that the opposite party now working as Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar should be careful in complying with the direction of this Court promptly.

¶24

-5-

¶25

10.1 As the restrictions due to the COVID-19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a 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 Notice No. 4587 dated 25^th March, 2020.

¶26

………………………..

¶27

K.R.Mohapatra, J.

¶28

M/S. Acrux Realcon Pvt.Ltd v. Pradeep Kumar Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Acrux Realcon Pvt.Ltd v. Pradeep Kumar Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sakuntala Sahu Vs Arakhita Sahu

Alekha Rout Vs State of Odisha

Jogendranath Pradhan Vs Purna Chandra Mohapatra

Umesh Ch.Biswal Vs Commissioner Land Records and Settlement

Padma Lochan Behera Vs State of Odisha

Chandra Sekhar Patra Vs State of Odisha