Order not enforced, HC talks tough

Legal Correspondent

Shimla, October 3

Non-implementation of the orders makes a mockery of the process of law and the effect erodes the faith and respect of the general public in the orders/directions of the courts.

This was observed by the High Court while dealing with a case where despite directions, the state government has not granted service benefits to the petitioner.

Taking a tough stand on the working of state officials, the court made it clear in the order that if the Secretary (PWD) did not implement the directions within two weeks, he would personally appear before the court to answer the charges that may be framed against him and listed the matter for further hearing on October 17.

It was brought to the notice of the court that the petitioner initially approached the erstwhile tribunal with regard to his grievances and on its closure, his petition was transferred to the High Court and it was allowed on March 21, 2012, with a direction to the state government to grant some service benefits to the petitioner. The state government assailed the judgment before the Supreme Court but the apex court also dismissed the petition of the state government.

During the course of hearing, Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan further observed, “This case reflects a sordid state of affairs that is existing in Himachal with regard to implementation of the orders passed by the courts that have attained finality right up to the Supreme Court.”

Justice Chauhan further observed, “There can be no doubt that in case the state is aggrieved, the state is well within its right to assail the judgments passed by the courts. But, once it has attained finality right up to the Supreme Court, then, I see no reason why the state should not implement the same, rather than driving the beneficiary of such judgment to another round of litigation by resorting to filing either an execution petition or by contempt petition.”

The court made these observations on a contempt petition filed by the petitioner against the state officers for non-implementing the judgment passed by the court.