Page 1

1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION  

CIVIL     APPEAL     NO.     5865      OF     2012   

(Arising out of SLP(C) No.1673/2006)

MUNNA LAL KAROSIA                          Appellant(s)

                    :VERSUS:

STATE OF M.P. & ORS.                       Respondent(s)

WITH  

SLP(C) NO.18120/2006, Civil Appeal NO.4665/2006 and

Civil Appeal NO.3510/2007

O     R     D     E     R   

SLP(C)     No.1673/2006:   

Leave granted.

We have heard the learned counsel for the  

appellant at length. A bare perusal of the impugned  

order passed by the High Court indicates that  

although stigmatic remarks have been made against  

respondent No.6, he was neither present nor heard.  

The impugned order would have serious adverse civil  

consequences on the appellant. Such an order could  

not have been passed without compliance with the  

rules of natural justice. On this short ground, in  

our opinion, the order passed by the High Court

Page 2

2

cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the impugned order  

passed by the High Court is hereby set aside and the  

appeal is allowed.  

Application for impleadment is dismissed.  

CIVIL     APPEAL     NO.     4665/2006:   

The appellant herein was respondent No.1 in  

Contempt (Civil) Petition No.335/2006 before the  

High Court. It appears that the order dated  

18.11.2005 passed by the High Court, was the subject  

matter of the SLP(C) No. 1673/2006. In the aforesaid  

special leave petition, this Court while issuing  

notice on 30.1.2006 directed status quo insofar as  

the posting of the petitioner in the above special  

leave petition was concerned.  

Mr. Tankha, learned Additional Solicitor  

General appearing for the appellant submits that the  

appellant merely acted in obedience of the aforesaid  

order passed by this Court and restored the position  

of Mr. Munna Lal Karosia as it was on 30.1.2006.  

However, one Mr. Rakesh Kumar Arya filed a civil  

contempt, being Contempt (Civil) Petition No.335 of

Page 3

3

2006 before the High Court.  The aforesaid petition  

came up for hearing on 12.9.2006. The High Court was  

of the opinion that the appellant was aware of the  

fact that on 16.1.2006 Mr. Munna Lal Karosia had  

already been transferred and relived on 22.12.2005.  

In view of the above, the appellant was held guilty  

of the contempt.  By an order passed today in SLP(c)  

No.1673/2006, the order passed by the High court on  

18.11.2005 has been set aside. That apart, it  

appears to us that the appellant herein had only  

acted in obedience of the order passed by this Court  

on 30.1.2006.  In such circumstances, it would not  

be possible to conclude that the appellant had  

deliberately disobeyed the directions issued by the  

High Court vide its order dated 18.11.2005.   

This appeal is, therefore, allowed and the  

order passed by the High Court is set aside.   

CIVIL     APPEAL     NO.3510/2007:   

For the reasons mentioned in the order passed  

today in Civil Appeal No.4665/2006, the appeal filed  

by the State is also allowed.

Page 4

4

SLP(C)     No.18120/2006:   

Mr. Jain, learned counsel at this stage  

submitted that since the order dated 18.11.2005  

passed by the High Court has been set aside in  

SLP(C) No.1673/2006 only on the ground that  

respondent No.6 was not heard, the matter may be  

remanded back to the High Court. We are of the  

opinion that after such a long time, it would not be  

in the interest of justice to remand the matter back  

to the High Court. Accordingly, this special leave  

petition is dismissed as infructuous.  

.....................J (SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR)

.....................J (H.L. GOKHALE)

New Delhi; August 6, 2012.