No need of electrifying speed, HC tells Tahasildar facing contempt

S Shyam Prasad | NT

Bengaluru: A Tahasildar facing contempt of court proceedings followed up a High Court order on ‘electrifying speed’ prompting the court to observe that if not electrifying speed, a reasonable speed in implementing court orders was necessary.

“We hope and trust that henceforth, the accused would comply the orders of this court positively, if not in an electrifying speed, at least, in a reasonable and justifiable phase which would avoid multiplicity of litigations and loss of valuable time of the court,” a Division Bench of the High Court said, while disposing a contempt of court petition against Anil Kumar, the then Tahsildar of Bengaluru North (Additional) Taluk.

The bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice MGS Kamal was hearing a petition by Doddanna, a resident of Yelahanka. An order of regularisation was passed on August 31, 2005, favouring Doddanna for issuing of ‘Saguvali Chit’ for the lands he was cultivating.

The order was not followed even after years and he approached the HC seeking a direction. On May 30, 2022, the single judge ordered that the ‘Saguvali Chit’ be issued after collecting the necessary fee.

When this order was compiled, Doddanna filed a contempt petition before the division bench. When the petition came up for hearing on August 11, 2023, the court was informed that the Tahsildar had submitted the to the Assistant Commissioner for approval.

Surprised to see the approach of the accused prompted the HC to pass a detailed order and to direct the accused Tahsildar to remain personally present before the court on the next date of hearing.

On the next date of hearing on August 18, the government advocate submitted that Doddanna had paid the ‘Kimmath’ fee of Rs796.22 on August 17, 2023, and on the same day the ‘Saguvali Chit’ was issued in his name in respect of the said land.

The Tahsildar also tendered his unconditional apology. In its judgement, the HC noted that the Tahsildar acted with speed after it expressed its displeasure.

“It is relevant to note that only when the order dated 11.08.2023 indicating strong displeasure about the approach of the accused was passed by this court, the accused acted in an electrifying speed,” the HC said.

However, the HC accepted the apology and disposed of the petition stating, “By accepting the apology of the accused and with the above observations, the contempt petition is disposed of. Notice is discharged.” (CCC 389/2023)