(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) On 10.2.2012, we had passed a detailed order noticing a trend that in large number of cases, directions of the Court are not being implemented by the Government officers. We had requested the presence of a responsible officer to suggest ways to eliminate delay in implementation of the court's orders. Shri V.S.Dave, Joint Secretary, Legal Department, and Shri Jayant M. Joshi, Under Secretary, GAD were present.
In continuation of our previous order dated 10.2.2012, we further record that today, there are several cases in which apparently, without any justification, Court's orders are not implemented within time.
In Misc. Civil Application No.163 of 2012, Division Bench of this Court by its order dated 13.10.2011 had stayed the decision of the learned Single Judge dated 13.9.11. The applicant complains that despite such stay, he is not yet reinstated in service.
In Misc. Civil Application No.177/12, Division Bench of this Court on 13.5.2010 while allowing Letters Patent Appeal of the applicant directed the authorities to consider the case of the applicant afresh in accordance with law. Since this was not done, the applicant filed the contempt petition in which notice was issued on 24.1.12 making it returnable on 24.2.2012. Today, learned AGP filed an affidavit of respondent No.1 and also produced the order dated 21.2.2012 by the Collector, Navsari rejecting the case of the applicant for grant of lease. Thus the order was passed after much delay and only after service of notice in contempt proceedings by the High Court.
In Misc. Civil Application No.2833/11, learned Single Judge of this Court by order dated 2.5.2011 directed respondent No.1 to consider and decide the proposal of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground as per the policy prevailing at the time of making such an application. Such direction was to be complied with within three months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Since this was not done, the applicant moved contempt proceedings in which notice was issued on 2nd December 2011. Till date, there is no compliance of the court's order. In fact, though duly served, even the learned AGP is not instructed to appear for any of the respondents.
In Misc. Civil Application No.3091/11, learned Single Judge by order dated 24th December 2010, directed the authorities to fix premium of the land of the petitioner for conversion as on the date of the application. After fixing the premium on such basis and giving adjustment for the amount already deposited by him and upon the petitioner paying additional amount to be paid, further steps for conversion of the land were to be taken. The entire exercise was ordered to be completed within ten weeks from the date of receipt of the order. Since this was not done, the petitioner moved contempt petition, in which this Court had issued notice on 9.1.2012. So far, the directions are not implemented. What is, however, stated is that the Department has preferred appeal against the decision of the learned Single Judge. Such appeal, however, was presented only on 8th February 2012, that is, more than a year after the decision of the learned Single Judge. Admittedly, no stay has been granted in such appeal so far.
In Misc. Civil Application No.3258 of 2011, learned Single Judge directed that application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment should be decided on the basis of the policy prevailing at the time when the father of the petitioner died. Such steps were to be taken within three months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Once again, when this was not done, contempt petition came to be filed in which notice was issued on 9.1.12 making it returnable on 10.2.2012. On 10.2.2012, it was conveyed that the State has preferred appeal against the order of the learned Single judge. Such appeal was also presented after the period of limitation had expired. So far there is no implementation of the order of the learned Single Judge.
From the above, it can be seen that only on a single day, there are half-a-dozen matters in which for no justifiable reasons, Court's directions are not complied with. This is not an unusual day when we get such cases in large numbers. Almost every single day, there are series of matters in which, officers of the State Government have completely ignored the court's orders, directions and deadlines. It was because of this reason we had, in our order dated 10.2.2012, required the presence of responsible officer to find a larger solution to eliminate or at least minimize occurrence of such cases.
Broadly, we can categorize the cases in three categories. First category is where the court's orders are innocuous only requiring the authorities to take decision in accordance with law. We fail to see why such directions should not be implemented within the time permitted. If for some reason, authorities are hard-pressed for time and are unable to take a decision within the time granted by the Court, nothing prevents the concerned authority from seeking extension of time.
Second category of cases are those where the issue has achieved finality either before the High Court or in some cases even before the Supreme Court. In such cases, delay in implementation of the court's order simply cannot be brooked. We fail to understand why and on what basis the State or its machinery would refuse to implement the order of the Court even after the highest court of the country has ruled in favour of a citizen.
Third category of cases may fall where larger policy decision of greater implication may arise. Such cases necessarily would be few in number. In such cases, it may be open for the State to take a conscious decision whether to accept a verdict of the court or to carry the issue further in appeal. Such decision also must be taken with due promptness. We simply cannot understand why the Government would take months and sometimes years in deciding whether a particular decision of the Court should be carried further in appeal or not. Simply to take a decision, such luxury of time is not permissible.
We still wish and desire that State comes up with some formula by which such cases of contempt can be kept to the bare minimum.
For the above purpose, this application is adjourned to 2nd March 2012, on which day, Secretary, Legal Department shall remain present before the Court. A responsible officer from GAD shall also attend the court on that day.
A copy of this order may be made available to the learned AGP.
(Akil Kureshi J.) (C.L.Soni, J.) (vjn)