Disposed

Pandhari Yadav v. Ashutosh Kumar Dwivedi, Nagar Ayukt

Allahabad HC25 Apr 2019CAPL/2513/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this contempt application regarding non-compliance of a writ order directing representation submission, the Court prima facie found a case for contempt but adjourned proceedings to give respondents a one-month deadline to comply after notification.

What did the court decide?

One month opportunity granted to respondents to comply with the writ order using registered post before contempt proceedings are initiated.

Pandhari Yadav Vs Ashutosh Kumar Dwivedi, Nagar Ayukt — Allahabad HC (2019) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2513 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Pandhari Yadav Opposite Party :- Ashutosh Kumar Dwivedi, Nagar Ayukt Counsel for Applicant :- Surjit Kumar

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

¶6

The applicant is before this Court for a direction to initiate contempt proceeding against the respondents for disobedience of the order dated 19.12.2018 passed in Writ-A No.27265 of 2018 (Pandhari Yadav v. State of U.P. & Ors.). For ready reference, the relevant extract of order dated 19.12.2018 is quoted as under:-

¶7

"This writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to make a fresh representation giving details of his initial engagement as beldar and the date of his working as Works Supervisor including copies of muster roll, if any. He must also mention the details of his alleged juniors, who are getting more salary than him. Such representation shall be made by the petitioner within three weeks from today. The respondent No.2 shall look into the grievance of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order thereon within a further period of six weeks."

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a certified copy of the aforesaid order alongwith other documents 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.

¶9

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 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.

¶10

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

¶11

The opposite party shall comply with the directions of the writ court and intimate the applicant the order through the selfaddressed envelop within a week thereafter.

¶12

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.

¶13

Order Date :- 25.4.2019 A. Pandey

Pandhari Yadav v. Ashutosh Kumar Dwivedi, Nagar Ayukt

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pandhari Yadav v. Ashutosh Kumar Dwivedi, Nagar Ayukt

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

Satya Pal Vs Om Narayan Singh D.M. and 2 Ors.

Dhani Ram Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Mukesh Dutt and 19 Others Vs Sri Vinay Kumar Dist. Basic Shiksha Adhikari Saharanpur

Nebu Lal Sharma Vs Satish Singh Dios

Subir Mukherjee Vs Nagendra Pratap Singh D.M. and Another

Smt. Rekha Rani Vs Smt. Rubi Singh, Secretary U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad