Read Time: 05 minutes
The Supreme Court held that the High Court was justified in issuing notice of contempt and that too directing the officer of the Government to remain personally present on the very first day
The Supreme Court recently ticked off the Andhra Pradesh High Court's practice of seeking the personal presence of government officers before it, ignoring the fact that they are often required to be in the field performing their official duties.
A bench of Justices B. R. Gavai and K. V. Vishwanathan set aside the order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court at the Judicature in Hyderabad.
The court was considering a 2013 civil appeal filed by the Commissioner of Intermediate Education, challenging the judgment and order of November 29, 2013, passed by the High Court, thereby directing the appellants, various officers of the State Government, to remain present in the court and show cause as to why action for contempt of court should not be initiated against them.
In a writ petition filed by the respondents, Y. Kumar Swamy and others, interim orders had been passed by the High Court, directing that the writ petitioners be continued in service for a period of six weeks from the said date. However, on an application filed by the State, the interim orders were vacated.
The order vacating the interim orders specifically noted that the writ petitioners were not appointed on a regular basis and that they were appointed on a contractual basis. It also noted that subsequently, the State had made regular appointments after undertaking a selection process through the Public Service Commission.
"While doing so, the State had also adopted the principle of 'last come, first go' with regard to the lecturers who were already working on a contractual basis," the bench said.
Thus, the court did not find that the High Court was justified in issuing a notice of contempt and, moreover, directing the government officer to remain personally present on the very first day.
"This court had reiterated, time and again, that the personal presence of Government Officers should not be casually directed by the Courts, inasmuch as they are required to be in the field for performing their official duties," the bench said.
The court, therefore, did not the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court to be sustainable.
The court allowed the appeals and set aside the High Court's orders.
Case Title: Commnr Of Intermediate Education Vs Y Kumar Swamy & Ors
Please Login or Register
