'Hierarchy of Judiciary Must Be Respected' : Supreme Court Cautions NCDRC Members Who Passed Directions Contrary To SC Order, Closes Contempt Case

While closing the contempt proceedings initiated against them, the Court categorically marked that all orders passed by the Top Court ought to be respected and fully complied with. It continued to say that the hierarchy of the judiciary needs to be respected and in that hierarchy, the order passed by this Court will bind the NCDRC as well as the judicial officers. 

To recap, on March 1, the Court had passed an interim order directing that no coercive steps should be taken against the directors of the company in the execution petition pending before the NCDRC.

However, on March 8, the NCDRC asked the directors to file affidavits of compliance. Later, on April 2, the NCDRC issued non-bailable warrants against the directors, returnable on April 26.

During the previous hearing, the court was not convinced by the explanation offered by the erring members of NCDRC. The bench also criticised them for not recalling the order after the notice was issued to them. In view of this, the Court had asked them to show cause why contempt of court proceedings should not be initiated against them.

Pursuant to this, a fresh joint affidavit was filed by the members tendering an unconditional and unqualified apology for the mistake committed by them. The Court was also informed that an order, recalling the above orders, have been passed by the NCDRC.

Attorney General for India R. Venkataramani, representing the proposed contemnors, submitted that the order passed on March 8 was not intended as a coercive step against the directors. Further, the members jointly expressed their unconditional apology admitting that there was a mistake on their part in passing the order.

With respect to the April 02nd order issuing the non-bailable warrant, it was submitted that it was a mistake as the members failed to note the order passed by the Top Court.

The Court though expressed its reservations to the aforesaid submissions, however, it took into account the relevant aspects including that an unconditional regret has been expressed. In light of this, the Court stated in its order that the members should have been more cautious.

Pertinently, in today's hearing, after the Union officer read the apology, Justice Kohli expressed her concern, saying that if it starts happening in this manner, then the orders passed by the superior court will automatically get diluted.

“So keep in mind that here is a party that have go a stay operating in its favour by this Court and turns around and find that police is trying to arrest because of the orders passed unintentional or otherwise by the NCDRC. That is what was a great concern to us.,” she added.

Accordingly, in the order, the Court underscored that the matter involved the life and liberty of the appellants who had to rush to the Top Court despite the protection granted to them.

“We are of the opinion that the deponents of the affidavit out to have been much more cautious particularly while issuing non-bailable warrants knowing that the same would affect the right to life and liberty of the appellants who despite the protection extended by this Court were left helpless and had to rush to this Court bringing to its notice the order passed by the NCDRC on March 8^th and April 22.”

“..It cannot be that when an order is passed by this Court is mentioned before the members of the NCDRC and a copy is sought to be handed over , the same should be ignored and brushed aside. Any orders passed by the Court ought to respected and fully complied with, in view of the fact that the hierarchy of the judiciary needs to be respected and in that hierarchy, the order passed by this Court will bind the NCDRC and the judicial officers.”

“In view of the above it is deemed appropriate to warn/ caution the deponents of the affidavit to be more careful in future and proceed to deal with matter with caution particularly when the order of superior court is placed before them for their information and compliance.,” ordered Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah.

After making these observations, the Court discharged the notice to show cause and closed the matter. Before parting, the Court directed that the chairperson of the NCDRC shall transfer (this batch of petitions) to another Bench.

Case Title: M/s Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt. Ltd. v. Sanjay Gopinath., C.A. No. 2764-2771/2022