The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) in Srinagar has issued bailable warrants of Rs 50,000 each against the Vice Chancellor of the Islamic University of Science and Technology (IUST) and its Registrar for defying the court orders.
“By failing to adhere to the judicial directive, the contemnor not only disrespects a specific order but also directly questions court’s ability to uphold the rule of law,” a bench of Member (Judicial) M S Latif and Member (Administrative) Prasant Kumar said, while issuing the warrants on Dr Sheikh Muhammad Imran’s contempt plea.
The Tribunal observed that despite its earlier directions requiring both officers— VC, Prof Shakil Ahmad Romshoo and Registrar, Shamim Ahmad Shah to remain present through virtual mode and file a compliance report, they failed to do so. Instead, they moved applications seeking exemption from appearance, citing their engagement in university selection committee meetings throughout the week. Rejecting the plea, the bench held that the exemption application was not filed in accordance with the CAT Rules of Practice, 1993, and was unsupported by cogent material establishing the inability of the officials to join the proceedings virtually.
Emphasising the importance of compliance with judicial orders, the Tribunal remarked that contempt of court “strikes at the very soul of justice” and undermines public confidence in the judicial system. “It goes beyond mere defiance of court’s authority but also denotes a profound challenge to the principles that underpin the rule of law. At its core, it is a profound disavowal of respect and adherence to the judicial process, posing a concerning threat to the integrity of the judicial system,” the Tribunal observed.
The Tribunal observed that the act of defiance erodes the public confidence in the judicial system and the court’s ability to deliver justice impartially and effectively. “Therefore, the power to punish for contempt of court is vital to safeguard the authority and efficiency of the judicial system”. The Court noted that it had sought only the officials’ virtual appearance to minimise disruption to their official responsibilities and questioned why the university meetings could not have been deferred briefly to enable compliance with the court’s directions. It also referred to judgments of the Supreme Court affirming the Tribunal’s power to punish for contempt and stressing that exemptions cannot be granted on vague or unsupported grounds.
Holding that the contemnors had failed to comply with its earlier directions, the Tribunal rejected the exemption application and directed issuance of bailable warrants of Rs 50,000 each against Prof Romshoo and the Registrar Shah. It directed the Superintendent of Police, Awantipora to execute the warrants and secure presence of the two authorities before the Tribunal on July 23 at 3 p m.
The Tribunal, however, granted the respondents additional time to file their affidavit and compliance report in accordance with the CAT Rules and clarified that its observations were confined to the contempt proceedings and should not be construed as an expression on the merits of the main case.
About The Author
