Rantosh Dhar Vs. Sashi Prakash and anr. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- - it is needless to say that the government have their own difficulty but the government must find out a system of engaging the workers in such a manner so that best service is received out of them. (emphasis supplied) the last part of the above order reflects with sufficient clarity that the court was very much conscious about possible difficulties of the government in introducing three-shift duty system within a period of eight months and precisely because of that reason the government was given latitude to devise a system for rational deployment of workers. it is now widely recognized in labour laws that for getting best service, a worker should not be forced to work for more than 8 hours a day. as has been seen in the first order, considering the difficulties to introduce the three-shift duty system within a time frame, the court excepted the government to find alternatively a system of rational deployment of workers to get best service from them. 8. inspite of that this court directed that the system should be introduced within a period of eight months, but hastened to add that as there might be difficulty in doing same, a system should be devised for rational deployment to get best service out of every worker. a.b. pal, j.1 the petitioner is a fireman posted at kunjaban fire service station under the directorate of fire services. in this contempt petition he has alleged that the two respondents herein have deliberately disobeyed the directions of this court contained in orders dated 1.9.2000 and 2.8.2001 passed in civil rule no. 296 of 1997 and, therefore, they are liable to be punished for civil contempt under section 12 of the contempt of courts act, 1971 read with article 215 of the constitution of india. the first respondent is shri sashi prakash, ias, who is presently chief secretary to the govt, of tripura, in-charge of home department. the second is r.k. sukla. ips, who is the director of fire services, govt of tripura. before proceeding further to examine whether there has been any such contempt of court, as alleged, it is necessary to notice the directions contained in the two orders aforementioned.2. civil rule no. 296 of 1997 was instituted seeking direction to the state respondents to introduce three shift duty system in all the fire stations as otherwise the firemen and other employees of the fire stations would have to perform duty for more than eight hours. the state government in their counter-affidavit contended, inter alia, that introduction of three-shift duty system in all the fire stations in the state was under consideration. on the basis of a submission advanced on that basis by the govt. advocate the said writ petition came to be disposed of with a direction to the state respondents to do the same within a period of eight months. the relevant part of the order reads as follows:the disadvantage of two-shift duty system is that a person is to work continuously for a period of 24 hours and that will affect the efficiency of a person and more so, of a fire station. the government in their counter-affidavit have already stated that the govt. is considering to introduce three-shift duty system in all the fire sub-stations in tripura as introduced at agartala fire station. that may be done by the government within a period of eight months by adopting a reasonable approach in the matter. it is needless to say that the government have their own difficulty but the government must find out a system of engaging the workers in such a manner so that best service is received out of them.(emphasis supplied)the last part of the above order reflects with sufficient clarity that the court was very much conscious about possible difficulties of the government in introducing three-shift duty system within a period of eight months and precisely because of that reason the government was given latitude to devise a system for rational deployment of workers. it is now widely recognized in labour laws that for getting best service, a worker should not be forced to work for more than 8 hours a day. the emphasis of the above order is thus not on introduction of three-shift duty system, which is undoubtedly one way of reducing duty hours, but on deploying the workers in a way so that their duty hours do not cross the maximum limit provided in relevant laws.3. this position came to be further crystallized in the second order dated 2.8.2001, which was passed in the wake of an application by the state government seeking further time for introduction of three-shift duty system. rejecting the application a learned judge of this court observed as follows:a fire station is expected to be provided with staff and equipments round the clock and as such, having regard to the related labour laws, none should be deployed in duty exceeding 8 hours and as such, the claim of the petitioners seeking three-shift duty system got approval of this court vide order dated 1.9.2000.a conjoint reading of the two orders aforementioned would convincingly establish that the thrust was to reduce the duty hours by means of three-shift duty system, not on the three-shift duty system itself. as has been seen in the first order, considering the difficulties to introduce the three-shift duty system within a time frame, the court excepted the government to find alternatively a system of rational deployment of workers to get best service from them.4. the petitioner herein has alleged that he has been subjected to work for 12 hours everyday and once in a fortnight the duty hour extend to 24 hours because of non-introduction of three-shift duty system even after long lapse of six years from the date of first order of this court. according to the petitioner, the two respondents are personally liable for not introducing the three-shift duty system in the kunjaban fire service station, which amounts to wilful disobedience of the orders aforementioned.5. this contempt petition has been filed on 2.8.2007 and during pendency of the proceeding the second respondent has issued an order on 26.11.2007 whereby three-shift duty system has been introduced in kunjaban fire station and maharajganj bazar fire station of agartala w.e.f. 1.12.2007. a copy of the said order has been made available for perusal of this court. my attention has been drawn by mr. s. deb, learned senior counsel for the respondents that in the newspaper dainik sambad an advertisement has been published in its issue dated 2.12.2007 (at page 11) inviting applications for filling up 224 posts of firemen. mr. deb has further submitted that the state government preferred writ appeal no. 110 of 2001 against the order dated 2.8.2001 of the learned single judge in order to highlight that it was not possible to introduce three-shift duty system in all the fire stations in the state in one go, the reason being huge financial implication and non-availability of trained personnel. however; as the state government itself was keen to introduce the system, proposal for creation of required number of additional posts was initiated by the second respondent during pendency of the writ appeal. because of the financial constraint all the posts could not be sanctioned by the finance department forcing the directorate to introduce the system in phased manner. it would thus be clear from the steps taken by the directorate that there was no intention to deliberately disobey the direction of this court, the delay notwithstanding, mr. deb submits.6. the order dated 26.11.2007 introducing three-shift system in two fire stations is enough to drop the proceeding. but before closing the same, i feel inclined to focus on the law of contempt, which is often wrongly restored to as an weapon for striking at individual grievance. but it is firmly settled that the law of contempt does not exist to address any individual grievance or to protect dignity of judges. the law exists to ensure that justice is done and solely to this end it prohibits acts and words tending to obstruct administration of justice. in air 1954 journal 45, v.g. ramachandran wrote:the concept of contempt proceeding is not meant to protect the judges personally but that it is conceived for safeguarding the honour of the seal of justice which must never be allowed to be ridiculed or interfered with so as to make the common man feel that the halo of divinity and justice is always kept pure and unsullied and he can look to the person enthroned in that seat of justice as a divine, impartial, unruffled emblem of justice.7. the apex court in air 1965 sc 745 observed that a court should never forget that the power to punish for contempt large as it is, must always be exercised cautiously, wisely and with circumspection. the law thus understood is that it cannot be resorted to for meeting any grievance of an individual or protecting the dignity of the judges. what is significant to notice is that the sole purpose of the law is to punish for any acts or words, which tend to interfere in the administration of justice. in the case in hand, the first order was passed on the basis of the submission of the state government itself that it was considering to introduce three-shift duty system. no time frame was mentioned in the contention advanced.8. inspite of that this court directed that the system should be introduced within a period of eight months, but hastened to add that as there might be difficulty in doing same, a system should be devised for rational deployment to get best service out of every worker. thus the essence of the said direction was not to introduce three-shift system within any particular time frame but to reduce the working hours by rational deployment. in the second order also the necessity to reduce the duty hours was highlighted. this non-introduction of the three-shift duty system within any period of time cannot by itself be termed to be an act of civil contempt within the meaning of clause (b) of section 2 of the contempt of courts act, 1971. if the state government can reduce the duty hours otherwise without introducing the three-shift duty system, the same would definitely amount to substantial compliance with the directions of this court in the two orders aforementioned. after all, introduction of such a system is absolutely in the exclusive domain of the executives where the court cannot step in if there is substantial compliance of the labour laws regarding duty hours by any other method of rational deployment.9. in view of the above it is to be concluded that there-has been no wilful disobedience, by the respondents, of the orders of this court aforementioned and, therefore, this contempt proceeding does not appear to have any merit. the same is liable to be dismissed, which i hereby do without any order as to cost. dismissed.

Judgment:

A.B. Pal, J.

1 The petitioner is a Fireman posted at Kunjaban Fire Service Station under the Directorate of Fire Services. In this contempt petition he has alleged that the two respondents herein have deliberately disobeyed the directions of this Court contained in orders dated 1.9.2000 and 2.8.2001 passed in Civil Rule No. 296 of 1997 and, therefore, they are liable to be punished for civil contempt under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India. The first respondent is Shri Sashi Prakash, IAS, who is presently Chief Secretary to the Govt, of Tripura, In-charge of Home Department. The second is R.K. Sukla. IPS, who is the Director of Fire Services, Govt of Tripura. Before proceeding further to examine whether there has been any such contempt of Court, as alleged, it is necessary to notice the directions contained in the two orders aforementioned.

2. Civil Rule No. 296 of 1997 was instituted seeking direction to the State Respondents to introduce three shift duty system in all the Fire Stations as otherwise the Firemen and other employees of the Fire Stations would have to perform duty for more than eight hours. The State Government in their counter-affidavit contended, inter alia, that introduction of three-shift duty system in all the Fire Stations in the State was under consideration. On the basis of a submission advanced on that basis by the Govt. Advocate the said writ petition came to be disposed of with a direction to the State respondents to do the same within a period of eight months. The relevant part of the order reads as follows:

The disadvantage of two-shift duty system is that a person is to work continuously for a period of 24 hours and that will affect the efficiency of a person and more so, of a Fire station. The Government in their counter-affidavit have already stated that the Govt. is considering to introduce three-shift duty system in all the Fire Sub-Stations in Tripura as introduced at Agartala Fire Station. That may be done by the Government within a period of eight months by adopting a reasonable approach in the matter. It is needless to say that the Government have their own difficulty but the Government must find out a system of engaging the workers in such a manner so that best service is received out of them.

(Emphasis supplied)

The last part of the above order reflects with sufficient clarity that the court was very much conscious about possible difficulties of the Government in introducing three-shift duty system within a period of eight months and precisely because of that reason the Government was given latitude to devise a system for rational deployment of workers. It is now widely recognized in labour laws that for getting best service, a worker should not be forced to work for more than 8 hours a day. The emphasis of the above order is thus not on introduction of three-shift duty system, which is undoubtedly one way of reducing duty hours, but on deploying the workers in a way so that their duty hours do not cross the maximum limit provided in relevant laws.

3. This position came to be further crystallized in the second order dated 2.8.2001, which was passed in the wake of an application by the State Government seeking further time for introduction of three-shift duty system. Rejecting the application a learned Judge of this Court observed as follows:

A Fire Station is expected to be provided with staff and equipments round the clock and as such, having regard to the related Labour Laws, none should be deployed in duty exceeding 8 hours and as such, the claim of the petitioners seeking three-shift duty system got approval of this Court vide order dated 1.9.2000.

A conjoint reading of the two orders aforementioned would convincingly establish that the thrust was to reduce the duty hours by means of three-shift duty system, not on the three-shift duty system itself. As has been seen in the first order, considering the difficulties to introduce the three-shift duty system within a time frame, the Court excepted the Government to find alternatively a system of rational deployment of workers to get best service from them.

4. The petitioner herein has alleged that he has been subjected to work for 12 hours everyday and once in a fortnight the duty hour extend to 24 hours because of non-introduction of three-shift duty system even after long lapse of six years from the date of first order of this Court. According to the petitioner, the two respondents are personally liable for not introducing the three-shift duty system in the Kunjaban Fire Service Station, which amounts to wilful disobedience of the orders aforementioned.

5. This contempt petition has been filed on 2.8.2007 and during pendency of the proceeding the second respondent has issued an order on 26.11.2007 whereby three-shift duty system has been introduced in Kunjaban Fire Station and Maharajganj Bazar Fire Station of Agartala w.e.f. 1.12.2007. A copy of the said order has been made available for perusal of this Court. My attention has been drawn by Mr. S. Deb, learned senior counsel for the respondents that in the newspaper Dainik Sambad an advertisement has been published in its issue dated 2.12.2007 (at page 11) inviting applications for filling up 224 posts of Firemen. Mr. Deb has further submitted that the State Government preferred Writ Appeal No. 110 of 2001 against the order dated 2.8.2001 of the learned Single Judge in order to highlight that it was not possible to introduce three-shift duty system in all the Fire Stations in the State in one go, the reason being huge financial implication and non-availability of trained personnel. However; as the State Government itself was keen to introduce the system, proposal for creation of required number of additional posts was initiated by the second respondent during pendency of the writ appeal. Because of the financial constraint all the posts could not be sanctioned by the Finance Department forcing the Directorate to introduce the system in phased manner. It would thus be clear from the steps taken by the Directorate that there was no intention to deliberately disobey the direction of this Court, the delay notwithstanding, Mr. Deb submits.

6. The order dated 26.11.2007 introducing three-shift system in two fire stations is enough to drop the proceeding. But before closing the same, I feel inclined to focus on the law of contempt, which is often wrongly restored to as an weapon for striking at individual grievance. But it is firmly settled that the law of contempt does not exist to address any individual grievance or to protect dignity of Judges. The law exists to ensure that justice is done and solely to this end it prohibits acts and words tending to obstruct administration of Justice. In AIR 1954 Journal 45, V.G. Ramachandran wrote:

The concept of contempt proceeding is not meant to protect the judges personally but that it is conceived for safeguarding the honour of the seal of justice which must never be allowed to be ridiculed or interfered with so as to make the common man feel that the halo of divinity and justice is always kept pure and unsullied and he can look to the person enthroned in that seat of justice as a divine, impartial, unruffled emblem of Justice.

7. The Apex Court in AIR 1965 SC 745 observed that a court should never forget that the power to punish for contempt large as it is, must always be exercised cautiously, wisely and with circumspection. The law thus understood is that it cannot be resorted to for meeting any grievance of an individual or protecting the dignity of the judges. What is significant to notice is that the sole purpose of the law is to punish for any acts or words, which tend to interfere in the administration of justice. In the case in hand, the first order was passed on the basis of the submission of the State Government itself that it was considering to introduce three-shift duty system. No time frame was mentioned in the contention advanced.

8. Inspite of that this Court directed that the system should be introduced within a period of eight months, but hastened to add that as there might be difficulty in doing same, a system should be devised for rational deployment to get best service out of every worker. Thus the essence of the said direction was not to introduce three-shift system within any particular time frame but to reduce the working hours by rational deployment. In the second order also the necessity to reduce the duty hours was highlighted. This non-introduction of the three-shift duty system within any period of time cannot by itself be termed to be an act of civil contempt within the meaning of Clause (b) of Section 2 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. If the State Government can reduce the duty hours otherwise without introducing the three-shift duty system, the same would definitely amount to substantial compliance with the directions of this Court in the two orders aforementioned. After all, introduction of such a system is absolutely in the exclusive domain of the executives where the Court cannot step in if there is substantial compliance of the Labour Laws regarding duty hours by any other method of rational deployment.

9. In view of the above it is to be concluded that there-has been no wilful disobedience, by the respondents, of the orders of this Court aforementioned and, therefore, this contempt proceeding does not appear to have any merit. The same is liable to be dismissed, which I hereby do without any order as to cost. Dismissed.