Srinagar: In a case of “contempt of the court” involving Deputy Commissioner (DC) Ganderbal, the High Court of J&K and Ladakh today ordered the officer to file his response by Monday next, and remain personally present before the court.
Pursuant to an order of August 02, 2024, the IAS officer Shyambir Singh appeared before the high court in person today. A two judge bench apprised him about the reference forwarded to it by the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) Ganderbal and the charge levelled against him.
Justices Atul Sreedharan and Sanjeev Kumar who heard the reference noted “to this, the contemnor’s reply has not been done intentionally to demean the court”.
The judges asked for forwarding the reference made by the judge of the District Judiciary, Ganderbal to the DC, Shyambir Singh so as to offer him an opportunity to file his reply to the charge levelled against him.
The bench directed the DC to file his response on or before the next date of hearing. It said that in account of the nature of the case, “this court would like to decide this matter one way or the other as expeditiously as possible and no further time shall be given to the contemnor to file his response.”
It posted the matter on August 12 with a direction “Mr. Shyambir, Deputy Commissioner, Ganderbal shall remain personally present.”
In July, the Sub-judge Gnaderbal issued a show-cause notice to Shyambir Singh as to why a reference be not made to the High Court of J&K and Ladakh for initiating contempt proceedings against him in terms of Contempt of Courts Act.
The Sub-judge Ganderbal, Fayaz Ahmad Qureshi, had passed an order against the DC for allegedly not complying with its earlier order in a civil suit. The judge also said that Shyambir Singh was attempting to “personally attack” him (Sub-judge) “by manipulation and fabrication”.
The judge accused Shymabir Singh of launching an inquiry into land owned by him (judge) as “revenge” for the order regarding a land acquisition matter, in which two Gujjar families pleaded that they were not compensated by the government for the land acquired from them, despite a decree in 2022.
In January this year, the court had directed the Deputy Commissioner to compensate the petitioners. In an order dated June 21, the court said that the DC had not acted on the January order, and directed that his and other officials’ salaries be withheld.
Later in a July 2024 order, the court of the Sub-judge said that its order “didn’t go well with Deputy Commissioner Ganderbal, Mr Shyambir, who attempted to personally attack the Presiding Officer (the Sub-judge) by scandalising him and weakening him by manipulation and fabrication”.
The court said “he (Shyambir) conspired with some other officers/officials of the district to implicate the Presiding Officer of the court for passing a lawful order against the judgment-debtors”.
The court accused Shyambir Singh of launching a vindictive investigation to “implicate” the judge in a false case.
“Out of the steps decided to be taken by the contemnor Deputy Commissioner against the Presiding Officer, one step was to frame the Presiding Officer in any fabricated incident, and if this is not possible, to trace out if there is any property in the name of the judge anywhere,” the court order read.
It said the DC, Shyambir Singh found out that he (judge) had two kanals of land in Ganderbal, and “misused his official machinery and devoted time in tracing out the documents of the property, which the Presiding Officer lawfully holds”.
After this, “as a first attack” on the judge, “a patwari visited his land thrice under the DC’s direction,” noted the judge.
It said that there does not exist any dispute at all regarding the land. “The committee was called to submit a report within two days and most of the members of the committee are from different jurisdictions having no authority to demarcate the land outside their jurisdiction,” read the judgment.
The court said, a committee was constituted by DC to “manipulate the spot position to demonstrate the land purchased and in possession of the Presiding officer (judge) as Khascharai, against the recorded and settled spot position.”
“Till the time order (for compensation to Gujjar families and withholding of salaries of the “delinquent officers”) was passed, there was no problem with the contemnor as regards the land of the Presiding Officer. But after passing of the judicial order in the execution petition, the contemnor (Shyambir) started misusing his position rendering him liable not only for contempt but criminal proceedings under Prevention of Corruption Act for abuse of the official position for ulterior motives.”
The order also said that as the DC may “try to implicate the judge in some false and frivolous case”, he has been issued a notice to explain why he should not be referred to the High Court for criminal contempt.
