High Court contempt case draws ire over IAS officers’ absence

Hyderabad: The High Court expressed strong displeasure over the absence of two senior IAS officers in a High Court contempt case. Principal Secretary of the Finance Department Sandeep Kumar Sultania and Roads and Buildings Department Principal Secretary Vikas Raj failed to appear despite bailable warrants.

The court questioned how the officers could plan to travel abroad after receiving Form-1 notices in the contempt proceedings. It also asked what they would do if authorities arrested them at an airport.

Judges questioned whether senior government officials understood the rules governing contempt of court proceedings. The court also expressed dissatisfaction with the explanation offered by the government lawyer for their absence.

The government lawyer said the officers could not attend because of the Assembly sessions. However, the court observed that the officials could have attended the proceedings online instead.

The High Court also indicated that it would not readily accept requests seeking exemption from personal attendance in future contempt matters. The court’s observations came after the officers failed to appear despite earlier directions.

High Court contempt case ends after apology affidavits

Following the court’s objections, affidavits seeking an apology were filed on behalf of the officials. The filings addressed the issue of their non-appearance in the proceedings.

The High Court subsequently considered the affidavits and closed the contempt petitions. The proceedings therefore ended after the officers submitted their apologies.

Meanwhile, the court made clear that senior officials must take contempt proceedings and attendance requirements seriously. It also stressed that online participation could have been considered when physical attendance was difficult.

The case involved Sandeep Kumar Sultania, Principal Secretary of the Finance Department, and Vikas Raj, Principal Secretary of the Roads and Buildings Department. Both officials had faced proceedings after the court issued bailable warrants over their non-appearance.