Telangana High Court on Monday quashed and set aside a single judge order awarding six-month simple imprisonment to six top officials and imposing ₹2,000 fine on each of them in a contempt of court petition.
Allowing the appeal petitions against single judge order, a bench of Chief Justice Hima Kohli and Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy said the contempt petition was barred by limitation. The bench, however, gave liberty to the respondents to seek appropriate legal recourse if they were aggrieved by the orders issued in the year 2010.
The six top officials, including two IAS officers and two IFS officers, filed the appeal petitions challenging the single judge order passed in the contempt plea. The division bench headed by the CJ observed: “we are of the opinion that the contempt petition having been filed highly belated by the respondents, was not maintainable in the light of the limitation prescribed under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act”.
The matter pertains to a writ petition filed by Mohd. Sirajuddin and nine others claiming rights over 383 acres of land in Maheshwaram village of Rangareddy district. In year 2009, a single judge instructed the six officials to take a final call on acquisition of the said land for conversion into Reserve Forest within six months. The petitioners filed a contempt of court petition stating that the authorities failed to comply with the single judge order. Eventually, they were held guilty of contempt and an order was passed awarding punishment to them.
Senior counsel S. Nirajan Reddy appearing for the six officials said the State government had issued two orders in year 2010 following the single judge order issued in 2009 in the writ petition. The government then rejected the claims of rights over the lands by the petitioners declaring it as surplus land.
Hearing the contempt appeal filed by the officials, the division bench observed that bone of contention in the case was service of the said orders issued in year 2010 to the persons claiming rights over the land. “The scope of the contempt petition is limited to pointing out wilful breach/default of compliance of a court order and not for pointing out events that occurred subsequent to the compliances made of the orders passed,” the bench observed setting aside the single judge order.
