The court held that a contempt case shall be closed as the impugned order was eventually complied with, noting the delay was explained and an apology tendered. No punishment is warranted.
The contempt case is closed without costs.
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.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN
CONTEMPT CASE No.215 OF 2012
ORDER:
The order, violation of which is alleged in this Contempt Case, has since been complied with albeit with a delay of more than two months. Learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the Learned Advocate General would submit that an application seeking extension of time has been filed in the Writ Petition, and the delay has also been explained in the counter affidavit filed in the Contempt Case.
While Sri T.G. Prasad Reddy, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, would seek to question the order passed by the District Collector on 11.04.2012, on merits, it cannot be lost sight of that the enquiry under the Contempt of Courts Act is limited only to the question whether the orders of this Court are violated and if so, whether such violation is wilful and deliberate. Since the order of this Court has been complied with and the order passed on 11.04.2012, is in compliance with the order of this Court, I see no reason to proceed against the respondents under the Contempt of Courts Act. Though there is a delay of two months in compliance with the order, since the respondents have tendered apology for the delay in complying with the order, and it is stated that a petition seeking extension of time has been filed in the Writ Petition, I see no reason to punish them for the delayed compliance.
The Contempt Case is, accordingly, closed. However, in the circumstances, without costs.
_____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J
April 23, 2012 MD
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN
CONTEMPT CASE No.215 OF 2012
April 23, 2012
MD
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to proceed with contempt proceedings despite delayed compliance with the court order.
Petitioner
Respondents
RAMESH RANGANATHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
