Contempt jurisdiction cannot add fresh obligations beyond the original writ order when compliance with the alternative direction is already shown.

In contempt jurisdiction, a court must confine itself to the express terms of the original writ order and cannot enlarge them by adding fresh obligations. Wilful disobedience is assessed only against what was actually directed, not against new relief the contempt court considers desirable. Where the alternative direction in the writ order had already been complied with, no further obligation such as creation of supernumerary posts could be imposed through contempt proceedings. The contempt orders were therefore set aside because the writ order had been implemented as directed and no wilful disobedience was established.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in contempt jurisdiction, a court can direct creation of supernumerary posts when the original writ order did not expressly require such creation and the alternative direction contained in that order had already been complied with.

Analysis: Contempt jurisdiction is a special and drastic power that must be exercised with restraint. In determining whether there has been wilful disobedience, the court must confine itself to the explicit terms of the order said to have been violated and cannot travel beyond its four corners or add directions that were not actually issued. A contempt court cannot supplement, modify, or expand the original judgment by creating new obligations, including a direction to create additional posts, especially where the party proceeded against has complied with the alternative relief granted by the original order.

Conclusion: The direction issued in contempt proceedings to create supernumerary posts was impermissible, and there was no wilful disobedience of the writ order once the alternative direction had been complied with.

Final Conclusion: The contempt orders were set aside, and the appeal succeeded because the original writ order had been implemented in the manner directed and no additional obligation could be imposed in contempt.

Ratio Decidendi: In contempt proceedings, the court may enforce only what is expressly or plainly implied in the original order and cannot impose a fresh substantive direction under the guise of securing compliance.

---