Disposed

Ratnesh Kumar Pandey v. Suhash L.Y. Distt. Magistrate

Allahabad HC2 May 2019CAPL/1366/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed impleadment of the District Magistrate. Finding a prima facie case for civil contempt of an earlier order directing funds for underground drainage, the Court gave the respondents one month to comply or face punishment. It directed the applicant to send the order via registered post.

What did the court decide?

Impleadment allowed; respondents given one month to comply with the order of 12.07.2018 before contempt punishment is finalized.

Ratnesh Kumar Pandey Vs Suhash L.Y. Distt… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1366 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Ratnesh Kumar Pandey Opposite Party :- Suhash L.Y. Distt. Magistrate Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Suphal Shukla

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

Impleadment is allowed. The same may be carried out.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

¶7

The petitioner is before this Court for a direction to initiate contempt proceeding against the respondents for wilful disobedience of the order dated 12.07.2018 passed in Civil Misc. (PIL) Writ Petition No. 3903 of 2018 (Ratnesh Kumar Pandey Vs. State of U.P. and others). For ready reference the order dated 12.07.2018 is quoted as under:-

¶8

"Heard Mr. R.S. Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sudhanshu Srivastava, the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel.

¶9

The only issue which is raised and pressed on this PIL is for the release of adequate funds for the construction of an underground drainage.

¶10

Bearing in mind the nature of issues which stand raised, this Court is of the considered view that the ends of justice would merit the District Magistrate, Allahabad, the second respondent herein, being commanded to duly evaluate the grievance raised and to take such further action as may be warranted.

¶11

We accordingly dispose of this writ petition by providing that it would be open to the petitioner to approach the second respondent by way of a detailed detailed representation within a period of two weeks from today. In case such a representation is made, the District Magistrate shall have the same duly enquired into and take such further remedial action as may be warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case with expedition. "

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a certified copy of the aforesaid order was submitted for compliance before the opposite parties but the opposite parties have wilfully not complied with the order and, thus, have committed civil contempt liable for punishment under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

¶13

Prima facie a case of contempt has been made out. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, one more opportunity is afforded to the newly impleaded opposite parties to comply with the aforesaid order of the Court within one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

¶14

The applicant shall supply a duly stamped registered envelope addressed to the opposite parties and another self-addressed stamped envelope to the office within one week from today. The office shall send a copy of this order

¶15

along with the self-addressed stamped envelope of the applicant with a copy of contempt application to the opposite parties within one week, thereafter and keep a record thereof. The opposite party shall comply with the directions of the writ Court and intimate the applicant of the order through the self-addressed envelop within a week, thereafter.

¶16

With the aforesaid observations, this application is disposed of at this stage with liberty to the applicant to move a fresh application, if the order is not complied with by the opposite parties within the stipulated time as aforementioned.

¶17

Order Date :- 2.5.2019 Manish Tripathi

Ratnesh Kumar Pandey v. Suhash L.Y. Distt. Magistrate

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ratnesh Kumar Pandey v. Suhash L.Y. Distt. Magistrate

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhim Singh Vs Anil Raj Kumar Addl.Registratadmn. Co-Operative Societies

Ram Dhani and 3 Others Vs Mr.Ravi Prakash Srivastava Posted Consolidation Officer

Ashok Kumar and Another Vs Dr. Anjana Goyal Presently Posted J.D.E. and Another

Deen Dayal Vs Dr. Roshan Jaikab D.M. and 2 Ors.

Ganesh Prasad Vs Suhas Lalinakere Yathiraj, District Magistrate

Nupur Srivastava Vs Sri Ajay Kumar Singh Secretary Basic Education U.P. Govt.