This order disposed of a contempt petition alleging wilful disobedience to the Court's order in a public interest litigation concerning municipal suspension of a resolution. The court found no demonstrated disobedience and dismissed the case.
Contempt case dismissed. No cause found to exercise jurisdiction.
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 JUSTI CE SANJAY KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE N.BALAYOGI
CONTEMPT CASE No.1441 of 2017
ORDER : (per SK,J)
This contempt case was instituted alleging wilful disobedience to the order dated 17.04.2017 passed by this Court in W.P.M.P.No.9822 of 2017 in W.P.No.7963 of 2017. By the said order, this Court took note of the fact that the Commissioner and Director of Municipal Administration addressed a letter dated 25.06.2013 to the Commissioner, Sadasivpet Municipality, calling for a detailed report and the same was submitted by the Municipality and directed the authorities to take appropriate action as deemed fit basing on the said report of the Municipality.
It is now brought to our notice that the Municipality’s resolution dated 31.01.1989 was suspended by the Commissioner, Sadasivpet Municipality, under proceedings dated 22.11.2013 and the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued Memo dated 14.02.2014 calling upon the Municipality to explain as to why the Resolution dated 31.01.1989 should not be cancelled.
Learned Government Pleader would state that in the light of the suspension of the resolution by the Commissioner of the Municipality, no further action could be taken.
Though Sri S.Jagadish, learned counsel, would challenge the power of the Commissioner of the Municipality to suspend the resolution, we are of the opinion that this issue does not fall for consideration before us in this contempt case. As no disobedience, much less wilful disobedience, is demonstrated before us presently, we find no cause to exercise jurisdiction under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
The contempt case is accordingly dismissed leaving it open to the petitioner to take recourse to appropriate remedies in accordance with law. No order as to costs.
____________________ JUSTI CE SANJAY KUMAR
__________________ JUSTI CE N.BALAYOGI
Date:08.09.2017 GJ
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner has demonstrated wilful disobedience to the order dated 17.04.2017 to warrant invokation of the court's jurisdiction under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 in this case.
Whether the challenge to the Commissioner's power to suspend the resolution falls for consideration in this contempt proceeding.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner
Commissioner
Sanjay Kumar
N. Balayogi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
