In a contempt jurisdiction matter, the court held that the absence of a time limit in the earlier order precludes a contempt order. However, to bring finality, the parties directed to conclude proceedings within three months.
Directed authorities to conclude proceedings within three months; liberty granted to petitioner to approach court again if failed.
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 JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.478 of 2021
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4394 of 1986
======================================================
Chandrika Singh Son of Late Mathura Singh, Resident of Village - Laru, P.O. - Dema, P.S. Mohanpur, District - Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dinu Kumar, Advocate Ms. Ritika Rani, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Nutan Sahay, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR)
Date : 20-04-2023
Heard Mr. Dinu Kumar, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Ms. Nutan Sahay for the State.
The petitioner had approached this Court vide CWJC No. 4394 of 1986 for the purposes of getting the order dated 22.11.1983 passed by the Additional Collector, Gaya declaring 9.84 Acres of land belonging to the petitioner as surplus land of Bodh Gaya Math in a
Patna High Court MJC No.478 of 2021 dt.20-04-2023 2/3
ceiling proceeding initiated against the said Math, to be quashed.
After hearing the parties the prayer was allowed and the orders contained in Annexures 1 to 4, which are the orders upholding the order passed by the District Collector by the superior authorities were quashed so far as it related to the land of the petitioners.
The authorities were also directed to exclude the lands claimed by the petitioners from the ceiling proceeding of the Math. Those lands were also directed to be excluded from final publication made under Section 11 of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 and the Gazette publication made under Section 15 of the said Act.
It appears that thereafter no order was passed and no notification under Section 11 or Gazette notification under Section 15 was issued.
However, the petitioner has approached this Court in contempt only in the year 2021.
A perusal of the show-cause reply indicates that the matter has yet not been decided though the parties have been heard. On one occasion, the judgment was reserved by the District Collector after hearing the parties but no final decision has been taken as yet.
Patna High Court MJC No.478 of 2021 dt.20-04-2023
3/3
This Court finds that since no time limit was provided in the order passed on 05.03.1997 in CWJC No. 4394 of 1986, there is no occasion for this Court to pass any order for compliance of such order in a contempt jurisdiction.
Nonetheless, in order to bring finality to the issues, we direct that the proceedings ought to be taken to its logical conclusion within a further period of three months, failing which the petitioner may have the liberty to approach this Court again.
This contempt petition is disposed of accordingly.
(Ashutosh Kumar, J)
(Harish Kumar, J)
krishna/shivank
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | NA |
| Uploading Date | 24.04.2023 |
| Transmission Date | NA |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a contempt order for compliance can be issued in the absence of a time limit for compliance in the original order.
How to direct the conclusion of proceedings regarding the exclusion of land from ceiling operations.
Chandrika Singh
State of Bihar
Shri Abhishek Singh
Shri Manoj Kumar
Shri Upendra Pandit
Numan Ahmad
Ashutosh Kumar
Harish Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
