The Supreme Court on Tuesday came down heavily on a government officer from Andhra Pradesh for willfully disobeying a High Court order and carrying out the forcible demolition of hutments in Guntur district in January 2014, declaring that such acts of defiance “can’t go unpunished.”
A bench comprising Justices B R Gavai and Augustine George Masih made sharp observations while hearing the deputy collector’s plea against a contempt conviction by the Andhra Pradesh High Court. The officer, who was a tehsildar at the time of the demolition, had proceeded with the removal of slum dwellings despite a High Court order on December 11, 2013, restraining such action.
“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,” remarked Justice Gavai during the hearing.
The Supreme Court gave the officer an option to accept demotion as a penalty for contempt. However, when the officer refused, the bench made it clear that he would then have to undergo the two-month jail term handed down by the High Court’s single judge for “deliberate and utter disobedience” of its directive.
The bench warned that continued defiance could have far-reaching consequences. “We will pass such stringent observations against him that no employer will dare to employ him,” it said, while refusing to treat High Court orders in a “contemptuous manner.”
The apex court was particularly critical of the officer’s actions, especially after being informed that he led a team of 80 police personnel to demolish the slum. When the officer pleaded for leniency, Justice Gavai questioned, “Jab 80 police walon ko lekar logon ke ghar giraye tab bhagwan ki yaad nahi aayi apko? (Did you not remember God when you demolished people’s homes along with 80 policemen?)”
The court emphasized that it was willing to show compassion considering the officer’s family and children. “We are giving you a last chance. Are you willing to go one step down?” the bench asked.
However, sensing the officer’s rigid stance, the court noted, “If he is adamant, we can’t help him. Then his attitude is very clear.”
Expressing discomfort at being forced to take a hard line, Justice Gavai said, “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 observed that the officer appeared to be under the impression that he would be reinstated after serving the prison sentence, and adjourned the hearing to May 9. Earlier on April 21, the court had also questioned him about his defiance, with his lawyer acknowledging that the officer should have obeyed the High Court order.
