R.S. SINGH versus U.P. MALARIA NIRIKSHAK SANGH & ORS.

Citation: [2011] 3 S.C.R. 760 · Decided: 09-03-2011 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MARKANDEY KATJU, GYAN SUDHA MISRA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2011] 3 S.C.R. 760 
R.S. SINGH 
v. 
U.P. MALARIA NIRIKSHAK SANGH & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 5600 Of 2006) 
MARCH 09, 2011 
[MARKANDEY KAT JU AND GYAN SUDHA MISRA, JJ.] 
Summons - Summoning of senior officials by the High 
Court - Interim order passed by the High Court directing two 
C Senior Government Officials to appear personally for non-
compliance of its judgment - Challenge to - On appeal, held: 
If there is non-compliance of the order, the High Court should 
first see whether the order can be complied with, without 
summoning any official - Government counsels can be asked 
D to communicate to the official concerned regarding the non-
compliance of the order - Senior officials can be summoned 
to give explanation only in some extreme cases where the 
High Court is convinced that deliberately the order of the court 
was ignored in a spirit of defiance - There should be mutual 
E respect between the judiciary and the executive, otherwise the 
system would collapse - In the instant case, the High Court 
was not justified in summoning the said two Senior 
Government Officials -
Direction. of the High Court 
summoning the two high officials set aside - Copy of the 
F order to be circulated to the Judges of all the High Courts and 
the Cabinet Secretaries, Union of India and State/Union 
Territories. 
State of Gujarat vs. Turabali Gulamhussain Hirani AIR 
2008 SC 86;State of UP. and Ors. vs. Jasvir Singh and Ors. 
G JT 2011 (1) SC 446 - Relied on. 
Case Law Reference: 
AIR 2008 SC 86 
Relied on. 
Para 13 
H 
760 
R.S. SINGH v. U.P. MALARIA NIRIKSHAK SANGH & 761 
ORS. 
2011 (1) SC 446 
Relied on. 
Para 13 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 
5600 of 2006. 
A 
From the Judgment & Order dated 13.11.2003 and 
18.12.2003 of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, 
B 
Lucknow Bench, Lucknow in Crl. Misc. Case No. 1457 (C) of 
1992. 
S.R. Singh, Niranjana Singh for the Appellant. 
Subramonium Prasad for the Respondent. 
The following order of the Court was delivered 
ORDER 
Heard learned counsel for the parties. 
This appeal has been filed against the impugned interim 
orders dated 13th November, 2003 and 18th December, 2003 
passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Bench 
c 
D 
at Lucknow. 
, E 
We have perused the said orders. 
A direction has been given in the said orders that the 
Principal Secretary, Finance along with the Principal Secretary, 
Medical & Health, U.P. Government shall appear personally 
F 
before the High Court on the next date for non-compliance of 
the judgment of the High Court dated 
15.11.1 
89/13.12.1989. DThis Court has been repeatedly observing th 
t the High Courts ordinarily should not summon the 
senior officials of the government and that sh 
G 
uld only be done in very rare and exceptional cases when there 
are compelling circumstances to do so. 
In State of Gujarat vs. Turabali Gulamhussain Hirani, AIR 
2008 SC 86, this Court observed: 
H 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
762 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2011] 3 S.C.R. 
"6. A large number of cases have come up before this 
Court where we find that learned Judges of various High 
Courts have been summoning the Chief Secretary, 
Secretaries to the government (Central and State), Director 
Generals of Police, Director, CBI or BSF or other senior 
officials of the government. 
7. There is no doubt that the High Court has power to 
summon these officials, but in our opinion that should be 
done in very rare and exceptional cases when there are 
compelling circumstances to do so. Such summoning 
orders should not be passed lightly or as a routine or at 
the drop of a 'hat. 
8. Judges should have modesty and humility. They should 
realize that summoning a senior official, except in some 
very rare and exceptional situation, and that too for 
compelling reasons, is counter productive and may also 
involve heavy expenses and valuable time of the official 
concerned. 
9. The judiciary must have respect for the executive and 
the legislature. Judges should realize that officials like the 
Chief Secretary, Secretary to the government, 
Commissioners, District Magistrates, senior police officials 
etc. are extremely busy persons who are often working from 
morning till night. No doubt, the ministers lay down the 
policy, but the actual implementation of the policy and day 
to day running of the government has to be done by the 
bureaucrats, and hence the bureaucrats are often working 
round the clock. If they are summoned by the C

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.