“Judges are not robots,” Allahabad High Court remarks amid contempt plea against Ghazipur DIoS
Prayagraj, June 02: The Allahabad High Court remarked in a contempt case that even though more than 800 cases are listed before a judge in a day, people still expect judges to work like super robots or supercomputers.
Justice Kshitij Shailendra said that while judicial proceedings take a long time to be resolved, parties cannot be allowed to blatantly disregard the court’s instructions during this time. He further said, “The law does not tolerate such audacity.” The bench said that if such a situation is allowed, the administration of justice will descend into chaos and disorder.
“In overburdened constitutional courts like the Allahabad High Court, where approximately 400, 500, 600, and sometimes over 800 cases are listed before each judge daily, judicial proceedings can take a long time to resolve. Sometimes it can take years and sometimes even decades. Yet, people expect such overloaded judges to be super robots, super computers, or superhuman beings, working nonstop,” the judge remarked.
The court made these remarks while hearing a contempt petition alleging the non-implementation of an order regarding a teacher’s salary. The District Inspector of School (DIoS) of Ghazipur had failed to implement the interim order passed on April 18, 2022. The state government justified this failure on the grounds that a stay petition had been filed against the court’s order.
The court strongly objected to the state’s stance. The court stated that a constitutional court’s order is neither a mere advisory nor a mere slip of paper that can be appreciated or ignored as per convenience.
“This involves the absolute authority of the Constitution and the solemn obligation of the rule of law. The moment litigants are permitted to treat judicial directions as optional, the very foundation of constitutional rule begins to weaken,” the Court observed.
The bench noted that the filing of such an application does not affect, suspend, inactivate, or render dormant the existing order of the Court.
It further stated, “If the mere filing of an application is considered a license to violate the Court’s orders, then every contemnor will easily evade compliance by filing repeated applications and then using the cover of their pendency.” If the mere filing of an application is considered a license to violate the Court’s orders, then every contemnor will easily evade compliance.
The Court further stated that such an approach is nothing less than a direct attack on the authority of the judiciary. Emphasizing the dignity of the law, the Court cited Mahatma Gandhi’s “My Experiments with Truth.”
Mahatma Gandhi’s famous statement, as expressed in his seminal work “My Experiments with Truth,” that “no one can insult you without your permission,” is also highly relevant in the area of contempt.
The Court held that an order passed by a constitutional court, unless it is effective and repealed, possesses binding force and unquestionable sanctity. If such an order is blatantly violated and the Court refrains from enforcing compliance or initiating contempt proceedings merely because an application to revoke, modify, or revoke the interim order is pending, the resulting erosion of judicial authority cannot be solely blamed on the contemnor.
The Court held that the District School Inspector of Ghazipur was guilty of contempt of court due to the failure to comply with the order for four years. Accordingly, the Court listed the case for hearing on July 8 to frame charges of contempt against him.
However, the court said that if he is advised to do so, he may still comply with the 2022 writ court order and be free from contempt.
