The High Court dismissed a contempt petition alleging non-compliance with an order directing an expeditious decision on a transport permit application. The court found the application was disposed of before the impugned order, negating the contempt charge.
Contempt proceedings (CONTC) dropped.
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 OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CONTC NO. 4627 OF 2023 Shankar Kumar Behera …. Petitioner
Mr. Digambar Sethi, Advocate -versus-
…. Dibyajyoti Parida, Collector-cumOpp. Parties Chairman, RTA, Ganjam
Mr. Pravakar Behera, Standing Counsel (For Transport Department)
CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No.
21.11.2023
2 . The Petitioner in this contempt petition alleges noncompliance of the order dated 9th March, 2023 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.4118 of 2023, wherein it is directed as under:
“Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the application filed by the Petitioner for grant of temporary route permit in respect of his vehicle bearing Registration No.OR-16C-4892 (Bus), disposes of the writ petition with a direction to the Collector-cum-Chairman, RTA, Ganjam-Opposite Party No.2 to take a decision on the application of the Petitioner as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order, if the application is still pending and communicate the result to the Petitioner forthwith.”
pursuant to the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.4118 of 2023, the Collector-cum-Chairman, RTA, Ganjam issued
Page 1 of 3
// 2 //
notice to the Petitioner on 10th April, 2023 fixing the date of appearance to be 19th April, 2023. Again on 24th April, 2023, the Petitioner was issued with a notice directing him to appear on 3rd May, 2023. But, subsequently order passed by the Collector-cum-Chairman, RTA, Ganjam was communicated to the Petitioner. From the above, it appears that a backdated order was passed to wriggle out of the situation of contempt of this Court. He, therefore, submits that action of Opposite Party is a clear case of contempt of this Court and action as deem just and proper under the Contempt of Courts Act should be taken.
Page 2 of 3
// 3 //
W.P.(C) No. 4118 of 2023, the Collector-cum-Chairman, RTA, Ganjam formally issued notice to the Petitioner. The same is not an evidence of pendency of the application of the Petitioner. In fact, application of the Petitioner had already been disposed of in the 7th RTA meeting held on 8th February, 2023, i.e. prior to the date of the order passed by this Court and the same has already been communicated to the Petitioner on 9th August, 2023.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
bks
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: BIJAY KUMAR SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 23-Nov-2023 11:46:06
Page 3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether non-compliance with an order directing expeditious decision on a permit application warrants contempt proceedings.
Whether the existence of a formal notice constituted pendency of the applicant's case when the application was disposed of prior to the order.
Shankar Kumar Behera
Dibyajyoti Parida
K.R. Mohapatra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
