09 May 2025 Civil Appeals >> Civil & Consumer Law  

The Supreme Court of India in the matter of Tata Mohan Rao v/s S. Venkateswarlu & Others., has upheld the contempt of court conviction of an Andhra Pradesh Tehsildar (now Deputy Collector), who was found guilty of forcefully evicting citizens despite specific High Court orders restraining such actions. While confirming the conviction, the apex court took a lenient view on the imprisonment sentence, opting instead for a demotion in rank and a substantial fine, citing the welfare of the official's family.

The case originated from a series of writ petitions filed by citizens claiming possession of land in Adavi Takkellapadu village, Guntur Mandal, where they had constructed houses. They sought regularization of their constructions through house site pattas.

In September 2013, the High Court directed the Tehsildar to consider these representations and restrained authorities from disturbing the residents' possession until a decision was made. However, a subsequent writ petition alleged that the appellant, then a Tehsildar, had removed structures despite the court order.

During a hearing on December 11, 2013, the High Court explicitly warned the appellant against taking the law into his own hands by forcibly removing structures, emphasizing the importance of rule of law in a democratic society. Despite this clear warning, it was alleged that on the night of December 12, 2013, the appellant, accompanied by a police force, forcibly evicted the residents, removed their belongings, and allegedly subjected women and children to physical abuse.

Aggrieved by these actions, two contempt petitions were filed. In March 2015, a Single Judge of the High Court found the appellant guilty of deliberately and willfully disobeying court orders and sentenced him to two months of simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000. This decision was affirmed by a Division Bench of the High Court in February 2025, which also reiterated that the appellant's misconduct despite repeated warnings was intolerable.

Appealing to the Supreme Court, the appellant's senior counsel argued that his actions were a bona fide effort to safeguard government land during a precarious situation arising from the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. He also highlighted that a 48-hour imprisonment could lead to his dismissal from service under relevant rules, rendering his family homeless and jeopardizing his children's education.

The Supreme Court expressed strong disapproval of the appellant's "inhumane" actions, emphasizing that such conduct was not expected from a public servant. The Court underscored that disobedience of court orders undermines the very foundation of the rule of law.

However, invoking the principle that "the majesty of law lies not in punishing, but in forgiving," and considering the potential severe impact on the appellant's innocent children and family, the Supreme Court decided to modify the sentence.

While confirming the conviction under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the Court ruled against imprisonment. Instead, it directed the State of Andhra Pradesh to:

• Revert the appellant to the post of Tehsildar (from his current position as Deputy Collector, to which he was promoted in October 2023).
• Fix his seniority in the Tehsildar cadre for future promotions only from October 31, 2023.
• Impose a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only), to be deposited under the NTR Housing Scheme, Government of Andhra Pradesh, within four weeks.

The Supreme Court stated that this modified sentence aims to send a clear message that no one is above the law, while also taking a humanitarian approach to prevent undue suffering for the appellant's family.

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971