New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday slammed a public official for disobeying an order and forcibly removing hutments in Andhra Pradesh’s Guntur district in January 2014 saying his actions “can’t go unpunished”.
A bench of Justices B R Gavai and Augustine George Masih asked the officer, now a deputy collector, whether he was willing to accept demotion as a punishment for disobeying the order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court.
When the officer refused, the bench said he would have to then serve the two-month imprisonment given to him by the high court in the matter.
“This can’t go unpunished. After a warning of the high court, if somebody indulges in these things, howsoever high one may be, he is not above the law,” Justice Gavai said.
The bench was unwilling to allow orders of the high courts to be treated in “such a contemptuous manner”.
The apex court warned the officer of not only directing compliance with high court’s sentence, but also ensuring he wasn’t reinstated by the government.
“We will pass such stringent observations against him that no employer will dare to employ him,” it added.
The bench was hearing a plea filed by the officer against an order of the high court’s division bench which rejected his appeals against contempt action.
The high court division bench refused to interfere with a single judge’s order sentencing him to the imprisonment for “deliberate and utter disobedience” of its order.
The single judge’s order came on the pleas alleging the officer, who was then a tehsildar, forcibly removed hutments in the district in January 2014 despite a December 11, 2013 direction restraining him from doing it.
When the counsel on Tuesday informed the bench about the petitioner’s unwillingness to accept a demotion, the court said, “We had said that we will ensure that his livelihood does not go away but if he wants the status. Let him have his status. Let him go to jail.”
The apex court said it wanted to save his career, and if the officer did not want it, the court couldn’t help him.
When the officer prayed for leniency, Justice Gavai asked, “Jab 80 police walon ko lekar logon ke ghar giraye tab bhagwan ki yaad nahi aayi apko (You didn’t think of God when you demolished people’s homes along with 80 policemen?”
The bench said it was trying to save the officer from going to jail after thinking of his children and asked him, “Are you willing to go one step down? Yes or no? We are giving you last chance.”
The court asked his lawyer to convince him on what the court was saying and said, “If he is adamant, we can’t help him. Then his attitude is very clear.”
When the matter came up again, the apex court said, “We are never such harsh, but you can read something between the lines.”
Justice Gavai added, “We don’t want to be like him. He has thrown people out of their houses. We don’t want to be harsh to him like he was harsh to those poor slum dwellers.”
The bench said the officer appeared to be under an impression that after serving two months imprisonment, he would be reinstated by the government and posted the hearing on May 9.
While hearing the matter on April 21, the bench questioned the officer about the reasons for his defiance of the high court’s direction.
His lawyer agreed the officer should have adhered to the high court’s directive.
