The Delhi High Court on Monday issued show-cause notice to the Centre as to why contempt proceedings be not initiated against it for filing a “false affidavit” that did not receive any proposal for sanction of revision of pay scales of public prosecutors from the Delhi government.
Justice J R Midha asked the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) to file its response by May 11 indicating who was the officer on whose instructions the “false affidavit” was filed.
The court issued the direction after it was informed by Delhi government counsel Rahul Mehra they have sent the Cabinet note in December to the Lieutenant Governor approving hike in the salary of the prosecutors of trial courts here. Mehra contended that the LG has put a stay on our proposal and sent it to the President.
He claimed the LG has stayed it on the ground that service matters do not lie in Delhi government’s domain.
On April 19, the counsel for the central government had told the court that they have not received any proposal for sanction of revision of pay scales of public prosecutors from the Delhi government.
The Centre’s response had come in the backdrop of its notice seeking its reply on a petition seeking contempt action against the Home Secretary for not complying with the court’s September 9, 2015 order.
The court in its September 2015 order had directed the Delhi government that the decision to increase the pay scales of Delhi public prosecutors be implemented without any delay.
The contempt petition filed by Delhi Prosecutors Welfare Association alleged “deliberate and willful disobedience” on the part of the Centre and city government in complying with the court order.
The association, in its petition filed through advocate Ashish Dixit, had said assurances to the court by the Delhi government to provide Internet facilities to the prosecutors have also not been done.
“It is submitted that despite there being explicit directions by this court for implementing the cabinet decision dated September 1, 2015 the respondents (Centre and Delhi government) have till date not complied with the directions.
“The respondent 1 (Centre) and respondent 2 (Delhi government) have demonstrated an attitude which violates the majesty of this court. The respondents deliberately and willfully have not complied with the directions of this court,” the petition said.