In a contempt application alleging non-compliance with an order directing encroachment proceedings under the U.P. Revenue Code, the court found based on an enquiry report that the order had been substantially complied with, dismissing the application.
The contempt application was dismissed with no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 28
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4148 of 2018 Applicant :- Altaf Khan
Opposite Party :- Baagish Kumar Shukla,Tehsildar And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Pratap Yadav
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
It is being alleged in the contempt petition that the order dated 23.2.2018 passed by this court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition (P.I.L.) No.2971 of 2018 (Altaf Khan V. State of U.P. and Others) has not been complied with. The operative portion of the order is extracted hereunder:-
"Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is permitted to implead the Tehsildar, Tehsil Nizamabad, District Azamgarh in the array of respondents as respondent no.6 today itself.
Heard Sri R.P. Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents no. 1 to 3 and 6.
Sri R.C. Upadhyay, learned counsel has accepted notice on behalf of the respondent no.4.
The petitioner in the writ petition is seeking a direction to the respondents to initiate proceedings against the respondent no.5 under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code for removal of encroachment over the Plot no. 82 and 87 area 0.0400 and 0.0810 hectares respectively, situated in Village Sarsena Khalsa, Pargana and Tehsil Nizamabad, District Azamgarh. A copy of the revenue record has been filed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition, which shows the plot in question to be recorded as Khalihan.
No useful purpose would be served in keeping the petition pending.
This writ petition is, therefore, disposed of with a direction to the respondent no.6-Tehsildar, Tehsil Nizamabad, District Azamgarh to enquire into the matter and take appropriate action, in accordance with law, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order in his office.
It is made clear that that court has not adjudicated the claim of the petitioner on merit."
In pursuance of the order passed by this court the competent authority initiated steps to comply with the order and initiated an enquiry in this regard.
The report of the Lekhpal Area dated 29.5.2018 indicates that in compliance of the order dated 23.2.2018 passed by this court, a spot inspection was conducted. The report asserts that one plot in dispute is vacant while in regard to the other plots the proceeding under section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Court are on foot. The proceeding under section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Court are instituted as case no.T.201815060201309/603 before the Tehsildar. The matter is subjudice. The order passed by this court dated 23.2.2018 has been complied with. There is no violation of orders passed by this court.
The contempt application is dismissed.
Order Date :- 21.8.2018 Pramod
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the direction issued in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 2971 of 2018 regarding encroachment proceedings under Section 67 U.P. Revenue Code was complied with.
Whether the applicant is liable for contempt for non-compliance with the impugned order.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Altaf Khan
Baagish Kumar Shukla
Ajay Bhanot
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
