In a writ appeal filed before the Madhya Pradesh High Court to challenge a judgment dated 29-10-2025 by a Single Judge whereby respondent 1’s writ petition was allowed, an order dated 21-04-2014 was set aside and costs of Rs. 1,00,000/- were imposed upon the State Government, a Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Pradeep Mittal disposed of the writ appeal and the connected contempt appeal while setting aside the impugned interim orders.
A connected contempt appeal was also preferred under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 by the then Engineer-in-Chief challenging the interlocutory orders dated 17-03-2025 and18-03-2025, whereby he was held guilty of civil contempt and sentenced to undergo fifteen days’ civil imprisonment for the alleged non-compliance of the orders passed by the Single Judge.
Respondent 1 was at a regularised post of Khalasi in 1996 and was entitled to continue on the said post with all consequential service benefits. He had earlier challenged the authorities’ actions in depriving him of the benefits flowing from his regularisation and seeking reinstatement on his original post. The Single Judge allowed the petition, directing his reinstatement with consequential benefits.
The said judgment was challenged by the State by a writ appeal which was dismissed by the Division Bench on 11-01-2013. Since the authorities allegedly failed to comply with the directions, respondent 1 initiated a contempt petition which was disposed of on 01-08-2018. As per the State, during the contempt proceedings, the respondent himself informed the Court that the Court directions had been complied with and that he had received the benefits. Hence, the petition was closed.
Thereafter, the State issued an order dated 21-04-2014 whereby the respondent was adjusted to the post of Peon in Janpad Panchayat, Biaora. As per the respondent, the said order was contrary to the earlier directions of the Court as he was shifted to another establishment having different service conditions and depriving him of the benefits attached to the post of ‘Khalasi’. Challenging the same, the respondent instituted a writ petition and the Single Judge granted interim protection by staying the order.
On 07-11-2024, an undertaking regarding compliance of the Court’s directions was recorded on behalf of State authorities. Finding that the undertaking had not been complied with, the Single Judge passed orders dated 17-03-2025 and 18-03-2025 holding the Engineer-in-Chief guilty of civil contempt and sentencing him to undergo fifteen days’ civil imprisonment. Aggrieved, the appellant preferred the contempt appeal. Thereafter, the impugned order was passed. Aggrieved, the State preferred the present writ appeal.
The Court stated that the Government of Madhya Pradesh, after the Cabinet decision, had implemented the order by the Single Bench by giving all benefits to the respondent. Thus, the appeal was dismissed noting that the cost amount had also been paid to the respondent.
It was opined that since in the present case, the decision was to be taken by the Cabinet of the Madhya Pradesh government, the appellant had been wrongly held guilty as it was not not competent to implement the order passed. The Court stated that contempt jurisdiction is quasi-criminal in nature and that punishment can be imposed only after strict compliance with the mandatory procedure prescribed under the Contempt of Courts Act.
The Court held that the Single Judge proceeded to sentence the appellant to civil imprisonment without framing any charge, issuing notice or affording adequate opportunity of hearing, which was violative of the principles of natural justice. Thus, the contempt orders dated 17-03-2025 and 18-03-2025 were set aside and the contempt appeal was also disposed of.
