Is the government bent upon disobeying court orders?

The court issued directions with a view to tackling the apparent apathy demonstrated by government officials in complying with court orders. The court also directed the registry to furnish the details of the contempt petitions to the Advocate General so that he can forward it to the Chief Secretary, who can, in turn, issue circular to all the departments for a time bound complains of the order passed by the court. 

Why are so many contempt petitions pending in the high court? Have the officers of the governmnet developed an indifference to implementing the court orders?

Normally, in the principal bench of the high court in Chennai ,about 40,000 writ petitions are filed annually. Likewise, in the Madurai Bench, around 20,000 writ petitions are being filed. In all, the writ petitions, either the state or the other governments or public sector units are parties and against them certain directions are given by the court. At times, the court also fixes a time frame for complying with the order. A sizeable number of orders issued by the court often direct the officials to take a decision in a matter pending before them within a time frame. In these matters the court mostly passes orders at the admission stage itself, directing the government advocate to take notice on behalf of the government or its officers. By the time the order reaches the office concerned and a decision could be taken, the time frame fixed by the court expires. This naturally results in an action for contempt initiated by the lawyer for the person concerned. 

Normally, the power of contempt vests on the high courts and Supreme Court by the Constitution, is to uphold the majesty of the court and that no one will interfere in the course of justice. The contempt can be both civil and criminal. In case of civil contempt, one has to establish that the person who is accused of violating the orders of the court had done it in willful disregard of the orders. When an official is found to have committed a deliberate act of contempt, he can be sent to jail for a period of six months and one can also be imposed with a fine of Rs.2,000. Most of the time, on getting the explanation of the official concerned, they are let off with admonition only. In the course of such orders, if any strictures are passed, it may have a bearing on the officer concerned in his service career. 

Not all the contempt petitions are filed to uphold the majesty of the courts. Unlike a civil court which has a power to execute its own orders and also has personnel to deal with the same, the high courts, while exercising their writ jurisdiction, have no mechanism for executing the orders. Therefore, most of the time contempt petitions are filed like execution petitions, so that the person who obtained an order can get the fruit of such an order. 

If the court finds a prima facie case, it issues a notice to the officer concerned (as contempt are always personal) concerned to appear before the court and explain as to why action should not be initiated against him for contempt. If he gives a satisfactory explanation, he is let off. If he apologises then before accepting the apology, the court must record a finding of guilt against him. Many a time, the department concerned aggrieved by the order passed writes to the higher officers seeking their advise to file an appeal to a higher forum against the order passed. This involves a long procedure and by the time the decision making authority gives a green signal the time for complying with the original order expires and it results in contempt action. Normally if appeals are filed and the higher forum takes it for hearing, no contempt will lie. Similarly even for implementing an order requires a conscious decision followed by consequential action. This also requires a further time. The officer concerned fails to move the court for extension of time and thereby making him liable for contempt action. 

These bottlenecks can be easily overcome by vigilant action of the various departments regarding court orders. It is not in every case of contempt it was preceded by a ‘willful’ disobedience of the officer concerned. Largely it is due to the red tapism of the government’s action which brings such contempt. Of late there is a huge increase of contempt petitions as against the department of education and health. It is mostly because these two departments are headed by technocrats and not having the experience of trained bureaucrats like members drawn from IAS and IPS. Unable to understand the technicalities of litigation these two departments are faced with large number of contempt petitions. 

Another factor which really exposes the govt. vulnerable for such action is the action of the courts in passing final orders even at the stage of admission by giving only notice to govt. counsels. Many a time either action would have been taken by government officers which would not have been brought to the notice of the court at that stage and at times the officer concerned may not have power to pass orders on the grievance expressed. These difficulties could be easily avoided by giving notice to the government officers concerned directly before passing a final order. The govt. panel counsels also do not show enough sensitivity when they agree to get the main case disposed of without notices being issued to the officers concerned. 

Anyhow the high court has directed the Chief Secretary to send circulars to all their officers and to convene periodical meetings with all officers concerned to remedy the situation. Ultimately it does not do any good to the government to be portrayed as being the biggest disobeyer of court orders.