Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M/s Bharat Traders, a mineral trader, filed a contempt petition alleging that the respondents, Maharashtra State Mining Corporation Ltd. and its officers, had violated an order dated 13.08.2008 passed by the Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No. 1689 of 2008. In the earlier writ petition, the petitioner had challenged the procedure for sale of minerals by the respondents, contending it was not transparent. The respondents had filed a reply stating that they would adopt a transparent procedure of open competitive tenders with wide publicity in newspapers, on their website, and by opening tenders in the presence of bidders. The court had accepted this statement and disposed of the writ petition. Subsequently, the petitioner filed Contempt Petition No. 172 of 2008, which was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh petition. The present Contempt Petition No. 114 of 2009 was then filed, alleging that the respondents had not issued any tenders after 13.08.2008 and had sold minerals without following the transparent procedure. The petitioner annexed a chart of sales to support this claim. The respondents filed a reply denying the allegations and stating that they had issued tenders with wide publicity. The court examined the chart and found that the sales mentioned were either prior to the order or were made pursuant to tenders issued with wide publicity. The court noted that the respondents had issued tenders in newspapers like Lokmat, Loksatta, and Times of India, and had also placed them on their website. The tenders were opened in the presence of bidders. The court held that there was no willful disobedience of the order and that the contempt petition was misconceived. The court dismissed the petition, observing that the respondents had substantially complied with the order.
Headnote
A) Contempt of Court - Willful Disobedience - Compliance with Court Order - The petitioner alleged that the respondents violated the order dated 13.08.2008 by not issuing tenders for sale of minerals after that date. The court examined the chart of sales and found that the respondents had issued tenders with wide publicity in newspapers and on their website, and had opened tenders in the presence of bidders. Held that there was no willful disobedience and the contempt petition was dismissed. (Paras 4-6)
B) Contempt of Court - Sale of Minerals - Transparent Procedure - The respondents had made a statement in the earlier writ petition that they would follow a transparent procedure of open competitive tenders with wide publicity. The court found that the respondents had substantially complied with the procedure. Held that the contempt petition was misconceived and dismissed. (Paras 3-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondents have willfully disobeyed the order dated 13.08.2008 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 1689 of 2008 by not issuing tenders for sale of minerals with wide publicity and transparent procedure.
Final Decision
The contempt petition is dismissed. The respondents are discharged from the notice of contempt.
Law Points
- Contempt of court
- willful disobedience
- compliance with court order
- transparent sale of minerals
- open competitive tenders
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (01) 265
Contempt Petition No. 114 of 2009 in Writ Petition No. 1689 of 2008
Shri. Ajay Maheshwari, Petitioner in person; Shri. C. S. Kaptan, Counsel for the respondents 1 to 3
M/s Bharat Traders, thr. Its Partner Ajay Dindayalji Maheshwari
1. Maharashtra State Mining Corporation Ltd., thr. Its current Managing Director, Sudhanshu Niranjan Kumar; 2. Dominic Gabrial Philips; 3. P. P. Soni; 4. State of Maharashtra
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Contempt petition alleging willful disobedience of court order regarding transparent sale of minerals.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought to proceed against respondents for contempt of court for violating order dated 13.08.2008.
Filing Reason
Alleged failure of respondents to issue tenders for sale of minerals after 13.08.2008 as per the court order.
Previous Decisions
Writ Petition No. 1689 of 2008 was disposed of on 13.08.2008 recording the respondents' statement to follow transparent procedure. Earlier Contempt Petition No. 172 of 2008 was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh petition.
Issues
Whether the respondents willfully disobeyed the order dated 13.08.2008 by not issuing tenders for sale of minerals with wide publicity and transparent procedure.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that respondents did not issue any tenders after 13.08.2008 and sold minerals without following transparent procedure, as shown in the chart of sales.
Respondents contended that they had issued tenders with wide publicity in newspapers and on website, and opened tenders in presence of bidders, thus complying with the order.
Ratio Decidendi
There is no willful disobedience of the court order as the respondents have substantially complied with the procedure of issuing tenders with wide publicity and transparent opening. The contempt petition is misconceived.
Judgment Excerpts
This petition alleges that the respondents have violated the order dated 13.08.2008 passed by this Court in Writ Petition no. 1689 of 2008 and prays that they be proceeded against for contempt of Court.
The respondents in their reply to the petition accepted that the sale of minerals should be done through open competitive tenders by giving wide publicity to the same.
Within a short time thereafter the petitioner filed contempt petition no. 172 of 2008 alleging that despite making a statement to the Court the respondents failed to issue tenders for sale of minerals after 13.08.2008.
The chart annexed to the petition shows that the sales mentioned therein are either prior to the order dated 13.08.2008 or are made pursuant to tenders issued with wide publicity.
In the circumstances, there is no willful disobedience of the order of this Court and the contempt petition is misconceived.
Procedural History
Writ Petition No. 1689 of 2008 was filed by petitioner challenging sale procedure of minerals. On 13.08.2008, the court disposed of the petition recording respondents' statement to follow transparent procedure. Petitioner then filed Contempt Petition No. 172 of 2008, which was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh petition. Thereafter, the present Contempt Petition No. 114 of 2009 was filed.
