The Allahabad High Court recently remarked that despite judges handling hundreds of cases every day, people often expect them to function like "super robots" or "super computers."

Justice Kshitij Shailendra made the observation while hearing a contempt petition concerning the non-implementation of a court order related to a teacher's salary.

The judge noted that in a heavily burdened court like the Allahabad High Court, each judge may have to deal with 400 to 800 cases in a single day. As a result, cases can take years, and sometimes even decades, to reach a final conclusion. However, this does not give anyone the right to ignore or disobey court orders while a case remains pending.

"The law does not permit such audacity," the Court said, adding that allowing people to disregard judicial directions would lead to chaos and undermine the administration of justice.

The case involved an interim order passed in April 2022 that was not implemented by the District Inspector of Schools, Ghazipur. The State government argued that a stay-vacation application had been filed against the order, which was why it was not implemented.

Rejecting this argument, the Court stressed that a court order is not merely an advisory opinion or a piece of paper that can be ignored at convenience. As long as an order remains in force, it must be obeyed.

The Court further observed that simply filing an application to recall, modify or vacate an order does not suspend its operation. If such a practice were allowed, people could easily avoid compliance by repeatedly filing applications and citing their pendency.

Calling such conduct a direct challenge to judicial authority, the Court emphasised the importance of upholding the rule of law. It also referred to Mahatma Gandhi's famous statement from My Experiments with Truth that "no one can insult you without your permission," saying the principle was relevant in contempt proceedings as well.

Since the 2022 order had remained unimplemented for nearly four years, the Court held that the District Inspector of Schools was prima facie guilty of contempt. The matter has been listed on July 8 for framing contempt charges. However, the officer has been given an opportunity to comply with the original order and purge the contempt.