HC slams casual and lethargic approach of State government
Taking note of many contempt of court cases initiated by litigants against the State government and its agencies for not implementing orders of the court for unreasonably long periods, the High Court of Karnataka on Monday suo motu initiated a PIL petition to streamline the procedure for compliance and to create an effective machinery to oversee implementation of the court’s orders.
“The orders of the courts so disregarded and neglected for their compliance bring about a situation where the public at large would view that the system has failed. It would be considered that the courts have been losing their authority and their orders do not have any effect on the authorities of the government,” the court observed.
A Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice N.V. Anjaria and Justice Krishna S. Dixit, passed the order while pointing out it has come across a large number of cases under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, in which “the authorities have been found sitting tight over the orders of the court for unreasonably long period.”
“The casual, lethargic and insensitive approach on the part of the authorities towards the compliance of the orders and directions of the courts cannot be tolerated. It has to be dealt with sternly. As the justice delayed is justice denied, too belated compliance is not to be countenanced, but has to be viewed as contempt of court itself committed in disguise or in indirect manner,” the Bench observed.
The Bench said that suo motu proceeding has been initiated for the benefit of the litigants, who were unable to enjoy the results of the litigation which have ended in their favour due by activating the authorities, to discharge their constitutional duty.
“As right to approach the court is a fundamental right, right to reap the fruits of litigation by getting the judgements, orders and directions of the court implemented without booking any delay unimpeded by the lethargic conduct on the part of the authorities, is also a right akin to fundamental,” the Bench observed.
The Bench also directed the State and its agencies to inform by June 5 what steps are generally taken by the authorities concerned to attend to the orders and directions of the courts.