AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Present petition has been filed by the petitioners, alleging that
respondents have violated order passed by the Financial Commissioner,
directing the parties to maintain status quo during pendency of the petition.
It has been urged before the court that cognizance of the
contempt committed by the respondent needs to be taken as he has failed to
abide by the orders passed by the Financial Commissioner, Haryana.
Reliance has been placed on judgment reported as K. Shamrao and others
Vs. Assistant Charity Commissioner, AIR 2003 Supreme Court 1828, to
contend that this court has the power to initiate contempt proceedings for
violation of order passed by an authority, over which this court has
superintendence and control.
Prayer has been opposed by learned counsel for the respondent.
According to him, the Financial Commissioner is still seized of the matter.
Petitioner has wrongly invoked jurisdiction of this court.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and given careful
thought to the facts of the case.
It appears, petitioner has a grievance against sanction of
Naksha ''Be'' and consequent proceedings by Assistant Collector 1st Grade,
Manesar in favour of the respondent. Aggrieved by said order, petitioners
exhausted their remedies of appeal etc. The Commissioner, Gurgaon
accepted the plea of the petitioners. Thereafter, revision was preferred by
the respondent before Financial Commissioner, Haryana, wherein he
directed maintaining of status quo till further orders. Petitioners allege that
respondent has acted in violation of the status quo order.
On due consideration of the matter, I am of the view that no
case is made out for invoking the contempt jurisdiction of this court. There
can be no dispute with the proposition of law laid down in Shamrao''s case
(supra). This court undoubtedly has powers of superintendence and control
over any authority, which has trappings of judicial tribunal and is capable of
giving a definitive judgment. In case this court finds that any order has
been passed in violation of law, this court can correct the same in exercise
of its powers under Article 227 of the Constitution. However, such is not
the issue in the instant case. The revision petition preferred by the
respondent is still pending before the Financial Commissioner. Grievance,
if any, can be raised before the same authority by moving appropriate
application. It is inexplicable why petitioner has chosen to invoke contempt
jurisdiction of this court straightaway. I feel that the petition is without any
merit. Same is hereby dismissed.