Vs. M.A. Mohsin & ANR  INSC 718 (9 September 1997)
BHARUCHA, M. JAGANNADHA RAO
O R D
E R This is a special Leave petition against an Order of the High Court at Patna declining to take proceedings in
contempt against the respondents. This is what the High Court said:
heard Mr. P.K. Sinha and Mr. Jai Narayan, Sr. Counsel appearing on behalf of
the parties, and also perused the show cause filed by the O.Ps. Although the
conduct of the O.Ps. does not appear to be very fair but in the facts and
circumstances of the case, I do not think if fit and proper to pass any further
the judgment and order has been complied with by the O.Ps., no further action
in this regard is needed. Mr. P.K. Sinha, learned counsel, submitted that
although the petitioner has been given promotion but all the consequential
benefits have not been paid to him.
goes without saying that if the petitioner submits all the to necessary
documents and papers there should not be any reason for the opposite parties
not to pass necessary orders for payment of all consequential benefits. This
contempt application is disposed of accordingly.
commencement of the hearing, we told learned counsel that in contempt
proceedings such as these, an Appellate Court will not interfere unless the
order is totally perverse. The Special Leave Petition has, nonetheless, been
argued at length. We are in no doubt at all that there is no perversity in the
Order that is challenged.
contempt jurisdiction is not to be invoked or allowed to be invoked to enable
the appellant to wreck personal vengeance against the alleged contemners.
Special Leave Petition is dismissed.