Vijay Singh, Secretary Home & Anr Vs. Mittanlal Hindoliya  INSC 1375
(1 November 1996)
1ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1996 Present:
Mr.Justice K.Ramaswamy Hon'ble Mr.Justice G.B.Pattanaik Prashant Kumar and S.K.Agnihotri,
Advs. for the appellants Dr.I.B.Gaur, Adv. for the Respondent O R D E R The
following Order of the court was delivered:
appeal by special leave arise from the order in the contempt proceedings dated
August 1, 1995 made by the Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal at Indore in
Miscellaneous Application No.99 of 1994.
admitted position is that the respondent was appointed as a Sub-Inspector in
the Police Department on January
1, 1960 and his date
of birth in the High School Certificate was August 5, 1934. In 1992, he filed an application
in the Tribunal for correction of his date of birth contending that his date of
birth was July 16, 1938.
Tribunal by order dated February
25, 1994 disposed of
the application with a direction to consider the representation of the
respondent. The representation was considered and rejected by proceeding dated May 23, 1994.
the respondent filed a contempt application contending that the appellants have
wilfully and deliberately disobeyed the order of the Tribunal and sought for
initiation of the proceedings against the appellants under Section 12 of the
Contempt of Court Act. In the impugned order, the Tribunal has held that the
respondent has not deliberately disobeyed the orders of the court as direction
was to consider the case afresh on the finding that the Director General of
Police had not applied his mind to the issue and therefore the impugned order
came to be issued. The question is : whether the Tribunal was right in its
giving directions? It is seen that the Assistant Inspector General of Police
who is the Administrative Officer assists the Administrator, namely, the
Director General of Police. He had put up the note on it and after
consideration of it the Director General of Police had made a note "inform
the respondent". Obviously, after consideration of the case he did not
agree wit the claim of the respondent and accepted the report submitted by his
subordinate, viz., Assistant Inspector General of Police.
it would be a case where due consideration was given to the respondent's
representation as per the directions given by the Tribunal. The Tribunal having
held that the respondent has not deliberately disobeyed the order, there is no
power to issue further directions.
appeal is accordingly allowed. The direction are set aside. No costs.
Pages: 1 2