Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a writ petition filed before the Jammu & Kashmir High Court by the respondents, who complained of non-supply of coal despite having made payment for the coal. The appellants, Managing Director, Chief General Manager and General Manager of Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., a Government of India Undertaking, contended before the High Court that the Income Tax Department had attached the money deposited by the respondents for supply of coal, thereby preventing release of the coal. While admitting the writ petition, the High Court passed an ex parte ad interim order on 27 August 1990 directing release of coal to the writ petitioners for which payment had been received. The appellants filed a counter affidavit and also a petition for modification of the interim order, bringing to the notice of the High Court the circumstances under which coal could not be supplied. Thereafter, by the impugned order dated 4 December 1990, the High Court directed that the earlier interim order be implemented within two weeks and listed the contempt petition along with the writ petition on 23 December 1990. On 20 December 1990, the Supreme Court issued notice on the special leave petition and stayed further proceedings before the High Court. The respondents appeared before the Supreme Court but none appeared at the hearing of the appeal. The Supreme Court reiterated the settled principle that while entertaining a writ petition, the High Court should not pass an interim order the nature of which is to grant a relief which can be granted only at the final disposal of the writ petition. Reliance was placed on State of J & K v. Mohd. Yaqboob Khan & Ors., 1992(4) SCC 167. Applying this principle, the Court held that the High Court's ex parte ad interim mandatory order directing release of coal effectively granted final relief at an interim stage and was impermissible. The Supreme Court set aside the order dated 4 December 1990 and requested the High Court to first consider the modification application filed on behalf of the appellants and thereafter pass any other appropriate order in accordance with law. The Court further requested the High Court to consider whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the proceedings for contempt should be pursued. The appeal was allowed accordingly.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Interim Orders Cannot Grant Final Relief - Constitution of India, 1950, Article 226 - The High Court passed an ex parte ad interim order in a writ petition directing release of coal for which payment had been received, effectively granting final relief at interim stage. The Supreme Court held that while entertaining a writ petition, the High Court should not pass an interim order the nature of which is to grant relief that can be granted only at final disposal; it set aside the impugned order and directed the High Court to first consider the modification application and then pass appropriate orders, also to consider whether contempt proceedings should be pursued. Held that interim mandatory relief in writ petition is impermissible (Paras 1-2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court could pass an ex parte ad interim mandatory order directing release of coal, which amounted to final relief, and later direct its implementation and list contempt proceedings without first considering the modification application
Final Decision
Appeal allowed; order dated 4 December 1990 set aside; High Court requested to first consider modification application filed on behalf of appellants and thereafter pass appropriate order in accordance with law; High Court also requested to consider whether contempt proceedings should be pursued.
Law Points
- High Court while entertaining writ petition should not pass interim order granting relief that can be granted only at final disposal
- modification application must be considered before enforcing interim order
- contempt proceedings in such circumstances may be reconsidered
