Court pulls up officials for mudslinging judge

● SANJEEV KUMAR tendered an apology and the bench recalled the notices served against him.

The Telangana High Court on Tuesday pulled up officials and government counsels for casting aspersions on judges and courts so as to hide their failures.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Hima Kohli and Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy issued showcause notices to Khammam collector R.V. Karnan and special government counsel A. Sanjeev Kumar for indulging in mudslinging after a High Court judge had imposed costs of `500 on the official for non-compliance of court orders.

However, Sanjeev Kumar tendered an apology and the bench recalled the notices served against him. The court was angered by an affidavit filed by the collector and drafted by government counsel which stated that the single judge had imposed the costs on the collector in a “predetermined” manner.

The bench asked how a judge could have a personal interest in punishing or imposing costs on an officer or any other person. "What did you think while leveling allegations against a judge? Open (your) eyes wide... see the difference between the judge and the judgment," Chief Justice Hema Kohli said.

“When the court orders were not complied with, costs were imposed. Does not the collector, who has around nine years of service, know how to respect court orders? When his neck was on the block, he implemented the orders. He has not even tendered an apology… after casting aspersions,” CJ Kohli said.

The notice issued to the collector asked why his statement against the single judge should not be taken as contempt.

Earlier, in 2019, Justice Challa Kondaram, dealing with a petition of one Karri Venkatramaiah, an agriculturist from Penubally of Khammam district, directed the collector to take action against ineligible persons taking benefits of government schemes and depriving those who were eligible.

As the court orders were not implemented, the petitioner filed a contempt case in September 2020. After contempt notices were issued, some efforts were made to implement the court orders of 2019. Noting this, Justice Kondaram had imposed costs of `500 on the collector, which was to be recovered from his salary and payable to the state.

The collector filed an appeal in the contempt matter, challenging the imposing of costs. In the affidavit, which was prepared by government counsel, he argued that the single judge imposed the costs in a “predetermined” manner.

The bench found fault with government counsel for supporting officials who don’t have any respect towards court orders.