Officers can’t be made to seem in court docket as a routine observe as their time is supposed for residents, the Supreme Court stated on Tuesday because it got here throughout a case of a Patna excessive court docket choose who had issued 142 orders summoning senior Bihar authorities officers in varied circumstances since October 2021.

Staying a July 13 order handed by the identical choose who was a part of a bench which issued bailable warrants towards Bihar schooling division further chief secretary KK Pathak in a contempt case referring to a instructor’s promotion, a bench of justices BR Gavai and JB Pardiwala stated, “In a matter where there is blatant disregard of orders passed by the court, it may be justified in securing personal presence of officers. However, such a practice should not become a routine practice.”

The Bihar authorities, represented by senior advocate ANS Nadkarni, knowledgeable the court docket that this was not a one-off case as one of many judges on the bench, justice PB Bajanthri, had previously issued comparable instructions summoning officers of the state. The state compiled a listing of 142 comparable orders handed by the choose in routine issues over the previous 20 months.

Noting this in its order, the bench stated, “No doubt authorities of state are bound to comply with court’s directions, such directions cannot be at the drop of a hat… Officers are supposed to discharge their duty to citizens. Their presence in court will deprive citizens of their precious time.”

Nadkarni identified that bailable warrants had been issued on July 6 regardless of the state having totally complied with the order issued by the excessive court docket.

The matter earlier than the HC pertained to an assistant instructor Ghanshyam Prasad Singh at a Nalanda college who had approached the HC in 2014 difficult refusal of the state authorities to grant him promotion in graduate educated scale on the premise of Sahitya Alankar diploma from Hindi Vidyapeeth, Deoghar.

The HC dominated in his favour on 23 February 2016 and ordered the state to grant him the requisite pay scale from the date his fast junior in service obtained the identical pay scale. The state challenged this order earlier than the Supreme Court however didn’t get reduction. In 2018, the instructor filed a contempt petition which was taken up in May this yr.

The excessive court docket requested the state authorities to clarify the seven-year delay in implementing its 2016 route and sought a response from the principal secretary within the state schooling division. In June, Pathak joined as further chief secretary and acted with alacrity to grant promotion as per the HC order. On June 20, he filed an affidavit inserting this truth earlier than the HC and searching for closure of the contempt case. The contempt petitioner was additionally happy with the state motion.

On July 6, the HC bench of justices PB Bajanthri and Jitendra Kumar famous compliance by the state however sought Pathak’s private look on July 13. As Pathak failed to show up on the assigned day, the bench issued bailable warrants towards the officer.

“It is to be noted that when personal presence is ordered, it was bounden duty of concerned officer to appear in person. If he has got any difficulty in appearing, in that event an application is required to be filed for exemption from his personal appearance. Such an application is not forthcoming as of today. Therefore, his personal presence is warranted,” the order stated.

As the officer was said to be in Jehanabad and never Patna on July 13, the court docket needed the officer to state so in his affidavit when he seems earlier than the court docket on July 20.

The state in its attraction drafted by advocate Rishi Awasthi informed the highest court docket that inside a month of the officer becoming a member of the schooling division, the HC order stood complied. Yet, such a senior officer was made to face contempt proceedings that may hurt his popularity.

Nadkarni who appeared for the state additional knowledgeable the court docket that the HC had a day later transformed the bailable warrants into non-bailable warrant to safe the officer’s presence. As this order was but to be challenged, the highest court docket bench stated, “With today’s order, there might be some relief.”

The apex court docket additional directed a duplicate of its order to be despatched to the excessive court docket Registrar General who shall carry it to the discover of the chief justice there.