Large Number Of Civil Contempt Petitions; No Machinery To Monitor Compliance Of Orders : Karnataka High Court Tells State Govt

first_imgNews UpdatesLarge Number Of Civil Contempt Petitions; No Machinery To Monitor Compliance Of Orders : Karnataka High Court Tells State Govt Mustafa Plumber9 Dec 2020 3:36 AMShare This – xThe Karnataka High Court has directed the State Government to make a statement before the court on December 21, on whether it is willing to appoint a Nodal Officer(s), for the implementation of the orders passed by the court against Government officers, in their official capacity. A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice S Vishwajith Shetty, while hearing a…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginThe Karnataka High Court has directed the State Government to make a statement before the court on December 21, on whether it is willing to appoint a Nodal Officer(s), for the implementation of the orders passed by the court against Government officers, in their official capacity. A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice S Vishwajith Shetty, while hearing a civil contempt petition filed by 66-year-old MADHURA BAI, said: “We direct the State Government to make a statement before this Court whether it is willing to establish a machinery which will ensure that by appointing Nodal Officer(s), the implementation of the orders passed by this Court against Government officers in their official capacity is monitored.” The bench took into account the fact that a large number of contempt petitions for initiating action for civil contempt are coming before the Court. In some cases, the orders of which breach is alleged are based either on an undertaking given by the Government officer or on the basis of statements made by the learned Additional Government Advocate across the Bar. It noted that “The reason for filing a large number of contempt petitions against the officers of the State Government appears to be that there is no machinery set up by the State Government to monitor the compliance of the orders by its officers.” Accordingly it directed :”The State Government may consider appointing Nodal Officer(s) for monitoring the compliance. After the orders passed by this Court are communicated to the State Government through the Office of the learned Advocate General, it is advisable that copies of the orders should be forwarded to the Nodal officer(s) appointed by the State Government. The Nodal Officer(s) shall be responsible for monitoring the compliance with the orders passed by this Court against the officers of the State Government.” Expressing the need for appointing a nodal officer the bench said: “A situation should not be created which will compel a litigant to approach this Court by way of filing a contempt petition. Such a situation can be easily avoided if a systematic effort is made by the State Government to ensure that the orders passed by this Court are complied with.” The court cited that the complainants who file contempt petitions are put to loss for two reasons: (i) they do not immediately get the fruits of the orders passed in their favour. (ii)they are required to shell out a substantial amount by way of fees and other expenses for filing contempt petitions. Moreover, even the officers of the State Government are placed in a very awkward situation due to filing contempt petitions. “Instead of doing their usual work, the officers are required to attend the Court for facing contempt proceedings. Sometimes, they are forced to engage private advocates to defend themselves,” it said. The bench said that “When orders are passed by this Court against Government officers in their official capacity, it is the responsibility of the State Government to ensure that the officers abide by the said orders.” Following which it said “It is advisable that when civil contempt is alleged against the Government officers against whom orders have been passed in their official capacity, the State of Karnataka should be impleaded as a pro forma respondent and a copy of the petition is served in advance to the Office of the learned Advocate General. Based on the service of a copy of the petition as aforesaid, if the Government Advocates and officers appear before the Court on the fixed date, perhaps there will not be any occasion to issue contempt notices to the officers.” The state has to make a statement on this aspect on the next date.Click Here To Download Order[Read Order]Next Storylast_img

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *