Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010166172025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/393/2025 LATIKA DAS W/O LT. DILIP DAS, VILL- GAURANGTARI PART-I, P.O.- FUTKIBARI, P.S.- SAPATGRAM, DIST- DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN-783345 VERSUS GYANENDRA DEV TRIPATHI, IAS AND ANR THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE (RELIEF AND REHABILITATION) AND D.M. DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GHY-06 2:DIBAKAR NATH IAS THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DHUBRI ASSAM P.O. AND P.S. AND DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-78330 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M HUSSAIN, MR A.K. MOLLAH,MR. R I MONDAL Advocate for the Respondent : , Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 04.08.2025 Heard Shri M. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner, who has filed this application alleging wilful and deliberate disobedience of the order dated 19.02.2021 passed in WP(C)/977/2021. Vide the aforesaid order, the Deputy Commissioner of concerned district was given certain directions to make an enquiry regarding the claim of the petitioner of an accident in a public place and on such satisfaction send the proposal to the concerned Department. The petitioner has annexed a representation dated 03.03.2021 to the incumbents. 2. As regards, the issue of limitation, the learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner was given assurance and has drawn the attention of this Court to the averments made in paragraph 7 of the application. He has relied upon the case of Pallav Sheth vs. Custodian and Ors. reported in (2001) 7 SCC 549 and the observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in paragraph 44 is pressed into service. The learned counsel has submitted that the cause of action has to be construed on which date the petitioner had visited the Office of the Deputy Commissioner. 3. The submissions made have been duly considered. 4. Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 prescribes the period of limitation which lays down as follows: “20. Limitation for actions for contempt.— No court shall initiate any proceedings of contempt, either on its own motion or otherwise, after the expiry of a period of one year from the date on which the contempt is alleged to have been committed.” Page No.# 3/3 5. As regards the case law of Pallav Sheth (supra), the observations relied upon are extracted herein below: “44. Action for contempt is divisible into two categories, namely, that initiated suo motu by the court and that instituted otherwise than on the court's own motion. The mode of initiation in each case would necessarily be different. While in the case of suo motu proceedings, it is the court itself which must initiate by issuing a notice, in the other cases initiation can only be by a party filing an application. In our opinion, therefore, the proper construction to be placed on Section 20 must be that action must be initiated, either by filing of an application or by the court issuing notice suo motu, within a period of one year from the date on which the contempt is alleged to have been committed.” 6. It has been laid down that the period of one year has to be construed from the date on which the contempt is alleged to have been committed. In the instant case, the direction of this Court vide the order dated 19.02.2021 was to be carried out within an extended period of 90 days and therefore, by following the aforesaid guideline, the contempt petition ought to have been filed within 1 (one) year from expiry of the extended period of 90 days from the date of the order dated 19.02.2021. However, the contempt petition has been filed only on 28.07.2025. Therefore, reliance on the aforesaid case of Pallav Sheth (supra) is misconceived. 7. As regards, the submissions that assurance was given to the petitioner which has been averred in paragraph 7 of the petition, this Court is of the opinion that an assurance cannot extend the period of limitation prescribed, more so, when the consequences under the Act is penal in nature. 8. In view of the above, this petition is dismissed on the ground of limitation. JUDGE Comparing Assistant