COCP No.750 of 2001 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.750 of 2001 Date of decision: 8.7.2009 J.S. Kanwar ......Petitioner Versus Sh. Satish Chander Sharma ......Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. R.K. Gautam, Advocate for the petitioner. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner for punishing the respondent for his wilful disobedience of the directions dated 23.2.2001 issued by this Court in CWP No.2624 of 2001. As per the averments made in this petiton, the salary of the petitioner was illegally withheld by respondent-Management. He made numerous representations to the respondent-Management for release of his salary and other dues but of no avail. He then filed an application under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, before the Labour Court, Chandigarh, for computation of benefits in terms of money. The Labour Court vide order dated 23.4.1999 allowed his claim for Rs.68,792/- along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of order. It is the further case of the petitioner that after passing of the aforesaid order, he sent a registered A.D. notice, to the respondent requesting for compliance of the order dated 23.4.1999. The respondent- Management did not implement the order of the Labour Court despite his repeated requests and the petitioner filed an application under Section 33- COCP No.750 of 2001 2 C(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act before the Assistant Labour Commissioner, U.T., Chandigarh for realization/recovery of the amount as granted by the Labour Court, from the respondent-Management. According to the petitioner, a representative of the Management had appeared before the Assistant Labour Commissioner, U.T, Chandigarh on 15.12.1999 and thereafter absented himself. The Assistant Labour Commissioner, U.T, Chandigarh sent a letter dated 17.1.2000 to the Collector, Chandigarh Administration, Chandigarh, for making recovery of amount awarded by the Labour Court as arrears of land revenue. The Collector vide letter dated 21.2.2000 sent the certificate to the Collector (South), New Delhi for recovery of amount from the Management as arrears of land revenue as awarded by the Labour Court but the petitioner was informed that the amount could not be recovered by the Collector, New Delhi, from the Management and accordingly, the case was sent back to the Collector, Chandigarh. It is the further case of the petitioner that thereafter, he filed CWP No.2624 of 2001 seeking suitable directions to the respondent- Management for implementation of the award of the Labour Court. The said writ petition was disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court vide ex parte order dated 23.2.2001 wherein the respondent-management was directed to implement the award of the Labour Court within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. According to the petitioner, he submitted the certified copy of the order dated 23.2.2001 passed by this Court in the office of the respondent-Management on 12.3.2001 but the respondent refused to accept the same and thereafter, the petitioner sent the certified copy to the respondent through registered A.D. Post. Thus, according to the petitioner, the respondent who is in the knowledge of the directions of this Court dated 23.3.2001 has committed COCP No.750 of 2001 3 contempt of the Court by wilfully disobeying the aforesaid directions and therefore, liable to be punished. A perusal of the file would show that despite the fact that notice to show cause as to why proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 be not initiated against the respondent-Management, was issued on 30.5.2001 by this Court, till date the respondent has not been served. Neither the respondent has appeared to defend himself. As per various office reports of this Court, the respondent has not been found on the addresses given by the petitioner and all the efforts of this Court to serve the respondent even through coercive measures have failed. From the various orders passed by this Court on different dates, it can be very well presumed that even the petitioner has no specific information regarding the whereabouts of the respondent. It is also relevant to point out at this stage that vide order dated 3.1.2002, the respondent was ordered to be served by way of dasti only. In pursuance of the said order, a report was submitted that the respondent had refused to receive the summons and therefore, vide order dated 14.2.2002, the presence of the respondent was ordered to be secured by issuance of bailable warrants. However, thereafter, the bailable warrants issued to the respondent were received back with the report that the respondent had gone out of Delhi and then on various occasions, the bailable/non-bailable warrants issued to the respondent were not received back. On 23.1.2003, learned counsel for the petitioner had stated that the respondent was deliberately avoiding service and, thus, this Court ordered that service be effected upon the respondent by way of Dasti process. However, as per the order dated 7.4.2003 passed by this Court, dasti notice issued to the respondent was not received back. Thereafter, again all the efforts made by this Court to secure the presence of the respondent through bailable/non-bailable COCP No.750 of 2001 4 warrants remained fruitless. On 24.3.2009, the petitioner sought an adjournment to obtain specific information regarding the whereabouts of the respondent and the case was adjourned for 2.7.2009 i.e. today. However, till date the petitioner has not submitted any information/correct address of the respondent and the learned counsel for the petitioner has insisted for grant of an adjournment to submit the requisite information for effecting service upon the respondent. It may also be pointed out here that the petitioner had in fact filed execution of the award of the Labour Court dated 23.4.1999 on which an order was passed under Section 33-C(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act by the Assistant Labour Commissioner, U.T. Chandigarh, issuing a certificate for recovery of the amount against the respondent. It is only after the petitioner failed to recover the amount in pursuance of the aforesaid certificate that he filed CWP No.2624 of 2001 seeking indulgence of this Court to issue directions to the Management for implementation of the award. It is relevant to mention at this stage that from the record of the contempt petition, it does not transpire that the respondent was served in any of the proceedings at any stage and he is in the knowledge of the directions issued against him by this Court. Even the order dated 23.2.2001, the disobedience of which is alleged by the petitioner passed by this Court, was ex parte. There is no definite evidence on record to establish that the aforesaid directions passed by this Court are in the knowledge of the respondent. It is well settled that in the absence of knowledge of the directions of this Court, non-compliance of the same by the respondent cannot be held to be wilful disobedience making him liable to be punished for contempt. In such a case, one who asserts that a person had knowledge of the order, must prove this fact beyond reasonable doubt. COCP No.750 of 2001 5 If there is any doubt, the benefit ought to be given to the person charged with contempt of Court. In the present case, it cannot be held beyond reasonable doubt that the respondent had the knowledge of the directions given by this Court. Thus, the benefit of doubt ought to be given to the respondent. Keeping in view the totality of the circumstances, this Court is not in favour of proceedings further in this case. Thus, the contempt petition is dismissed and the rule against the respondent stands discharged. July 8, 2009 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE COCP No.750 of 2001 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.750 of 2001 Date of decision: 2009 J.S. Kanwar ......Petitioner Versus Sh. Satish Chander Sharma ......Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. R.K. Gautam, Advocate for the petitioner. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.