Court No. - 10
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 6425 of 2019 Applicant :- Harjinder Kaur Opposite Party :- Sri Jagdish Prasad, Additional District And Session Judge And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Awadhesh Kumar Mishra Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Standing Counsel.
The present contempt application has been preferred against the wilful defiance of the order dated 27.4.2017 passed by this Court in Matters Under Article 227 No.2658 of 2017 (Amreek Singh v. 8th Addl. District Judge, Ghaziabad & Anr.), which for ready reference is quoted as under:-
"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri S.C. Dwivedi for the respondent no.2 and perused the record.
The present petition has been filed for a direction upon the Court concerned to decide execution case no.5 of 2002, arising out of Land Acquisition Reference No.166 of 1993 (Amreek Singh Vs. State) within stipulated period.
It has been stated that against the award passed in LAR No.166 of 1993, an appeal preferred by the other side has been dismissed by this Court vide judgement and order dated 17th May, 2016 and there is no interim order operating against the award, yet the execution Court is not proceeding to bring execution proceeding to its logical conclusion. It is thus prayed that the Court concerned be directed to ensure that the award is executed expeditiously.
Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this petition is disposed of with direction upon the execution Court to ensure that proceedings of execution case no.5 of 2002 are brought to its logical conclusion expeditiously without entertaining unnecessary adjournment and that some effective order be passed in the said proceeding, preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, unless there is any legal impediment in doing so."
Learned counsel for the applicant on the basis of order sheet of the execution case in question, which is appended along with contempt application, has tried to impress the Court that even though the order in question passed by the this Court has been placed before the Presiding Officer on 7.7.2017 but still the proceeding is at its normal pace and at no point of time the Presiding Officer has taken any pain to expedite the proceeding as per the mandate of this Court, and as such there is wilful defiance of the order in question.
The Court has proceeded to examine the record in question and find that the opposite party no.1- Presiding Officer has not made any sincere efforts to finalise the case in question and even the decretal amount has also not been deposited by the UPSIDC and as such prima facie contempt is made out against the Presiding Officer-opposite party no.1. Once there is clear cut direction issued by this Court to finalise the proceeding in question well within time, the same must be honoured and no leniency should be adopted by the Presiding Officer.
Consequently, the present contempt application is disposed of asking the Presiding Officer to finalise the proceedings in question expeditiously and preferably within three months without according even a single adjournment to either of the parties and if necessary day to day hearing may also be ensured in the matter. This order must be placed before the Presiding Officer within a week's time. In case the opposite party no. 1 does not finalise the said proceedings within four months time, the applicant would be at liberty to file another contempt application impleading the Presiding Officer.
Order Date :- 30.9.2019 Arif/SP/