Official Notings Mentioning Grounds Of Appeal Can Be Fair Criticism: Madhya Pradesh HC Drops Contempt Proceedings Against Revenue Officials

The Court was hearing a Miscellaneous Civil Case which had been drawn on reference received by the Trial Court for proceeding against the respondents for committing contempt of Court by making comments upon the judgment and decree passed by the Lower Appellate Court.

The bench of Justice Vivek Jain observed, “…it is an internal communication and that too not a malicious criticism of the appellate Court so as to attract action under Contempt of Courts Act but it is a ground noted by the SDO while guiding the subordinate authority in the matter of filing appeal…Official notings of this nature mentioning grounds of appeal can be said to be fair criticism in terms of Section 5.”

Additional Advocate General Amit Seth appeared for the respondents.

Brief Facts-

In the present case, the plaintiffs initially filed a suit for a declaration of title and permanent injunction, which was dismissed by the trial Court. On appeal, the Appellate Court reversed the decision and declared the plaintiffs as the owners of the disputed land and entitled them to have their names mutated in the land records. The trial Court initiated contempt proceedings against revenue officials, including the Tehsildar and Sub-Divisional Officer, for making critical comments on the Appellate Court's judgment. It was alleged that their comments were to undermine the judicial process and constitute contempt of the Appellate Court.

The Court said that unless the authority while in the course of the decision to file an appeal takes note of the infirmity in the order of which the appeal is to be filed as per the wisdom of said authority taking said decision, it cannot properly guide the subordinate authority.

The Court observed, “The Government functions in bureaucratic manner and every opinion has to be recorded in writing. The permission for granting appeal has to be in writing. Unless the authority guides the subordinate authority to file appeal on particular grounds, merely mentioning the proposed grounds cannot be said to be a contemptuous act on the part of the authority who is seized of the matter to take decision to file appeal.”

The Court further said that the notings are only internal communications and it is not the case that the authority refused to comply with the order stating that the order of the Court is not proper in law.

Accordingly, the Court disposed of the Miscellaneous Civil Case.