NEW DELHI ,10 March 2026 : The Supreme Court recently took exception to the growing practice of litigants failing to comply with court orders and then filing delayed appeals challenging such orders, only to stall contempt of court proceedings initiated for their non-compliance with earlier directives.
A Bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and R Mahadevan made the observation in a February 24 order.
The Court was dealing with a case where officers of the Chhattisgarh State Minor Forest Produce Federation had indicated that they were awaiting the outcome of a review petition to decide on whether to comply with certain court directives in a service dispute.
The Court strongly criticised the federation for taking such an approach. Notably, it also flagged a larger trend of litigants filing appeals challenging court orders only after contempt proceedings are initiated over their failure to comply with court directives.
“Delayed filing of appeals should be the exception, but in recent times, the exception has practically evolved to become the rule. Orders passed by the Courts are not complied with for a long time, and when Contempt Petitions are filed, belated appeals, with tremendous delay, are preferred,” the Court noted.
The Bench observed that such tactics are often used to secure adjournments in contempt proceedings by merely producing proof that an appeal has been filed.
“We, in no uncertain terms, deprecate these practices. It is felt that by such modus operandi, disobedient litigants act brazenly which has the further effect of bringing down the authority and majesty of the Courts and the rule of law, interfering in the administration of justice. The same may well, in certain situations, border on criminal contempt,” the Court warned.
The Bench further emphasised that High Courts should deal with such unscrupulous litigants with iron hands, more so when they happen to be State functionaries. It warned that failure to do so could erode public faith in the judiciary.
“It is the solemn duty of all of us manning the Courts across the hierarchy to ensure that the public faith never wavers,” the Court added.
The Court made these observations while dealing with two contempt petitions. The petitioners had earlier approached the top court by way of civil appeals seeking service-related relief against authorities linked to the Chhattisgarh State Minor Forest Produce Cooperative Federation.
In a May 20, 2025 judgment, the top court directed the authorities to grant certain reliefs to the petitioners, including the creation of a supernumerary post of “Godown Keeper.” It had granted three months’ time to implement the directions, setting the compliance deadline as August 20, 2025.
The directions, however, were not implemented within the stipulated period. Instead, the Managing Director of the Federation wrote to the State government seeking guidance on implementing the order after more than two months of the compliance period had already elapsed.
Subsequent correspondence took place between the Federation and the State government.
On October 3, the State government wrote back asking whether all legal options had been exhausted against the Supreme Court’s judgment.
The compliance deadline expired on August 20, and a review petition challenging the May 20 judgment was subsequently filed in October 2025.
Following this, the petitioners moved the top court by filing contempt petitions alleging non-compliance by the Federation with the May 20 judgment.
