New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India has strongly criticised the growing tendency of litigants—particularly government authorities—to ignore court orders and file appeals or review petitions only after contempt proceedings are initiated. The court said such conduct must be dealt with firmly to prevent erosion of public confidence in the judiciary.
A bench comprising Ahsanuddin Amanullah and R. Mahadevan observed that courts should take strict action against those who deliberately fail to comply with judicial directions. It added that public faith in the justice system could weaken if such practices continue unchecked.
The bench also ruled that arguments such as administrative difficulties or claims of impossibility cannot be used as a defence in contempt proceedings if the concerned party failed to inform the court about the difficulties within the stipulated time for implementing its order.
The court noted that delayed appeals were meant to be rare exceptions, but in recent times they have increasingly become the norm. It pointed out that many litigants ignore court orders for extended periods and only file appeals after contempt petitions are filed, often with significant delays.
Condemning this pattern, the court said such tactics undermine the authority and dignity of the judiciary and disrupt the administration of justice. In some cases, it added, such conduct could amount to criminal contempt.
The bench further directed high courts to act decisively against such “unscrupulous litigants,” especially when the violators are government bodies or entities falling within the definition of the State under Article 12 of the Constitution. It warned that failure to act firmly could lead to a gradual decline in the public’s trust in the judiciary.
While emphasising that justice is often balanced with mercy, the court said strong action must be taken against dishonest litigants. It also suggested that the existing liberal approach in contempt jurisprudence may need reconsideration.
The court clarified that contempt proceedings would not be limited to the parties directly involved in a case. Third parties or officials involved in the decision-making chain could also be held accountable if they knowingly fail to comply with a court order.
The observations came while hearing a contempt petition against officials of the Government of Chhattisgarh for failing to implement an earlier order regarding the regularisation of employees’ services. The court granted the authorities a final opportunity, directing them to comply with the order within 15 days.
