Disposed

Rishipal Singh v. Parthsarthi Sen Sharma, the Commissioner, Gram Vikas

Allahabad HC13 Jul 2020CAPL/1704/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court examined an application for civil contempt regarding the opposite party's failure to comply with a writ court order mandating the conclusion of a service enquiry within two months. A prima facie case of contempt was recognized, but the applicant was granted additional time for compliance across two weeks.

What did the court decide?

The opposite party is granted one more opportunity to comply with the writ court order within six weeks. The applicant is directed to send a registered envelope and self-addressed envelope to ensure s

Rishipal Singh Vs Parthsarthi Sen Sharma, the… — Contempt of Court | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1704 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Rishipal Singh Opposite Party :- Parthsarthi Sen Sharma, The Commissioner, Gram Vikas

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Srivastava,Shrikant Srivastava

¶5

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

¶7

By order dated 22.11.2019 passed in Writ A No. 18323 of 2019 filed by the applicant, this Court directed as under:

¶8

"However, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction to the enquiry officer to conclude the enquiry within two months from the date of production of a certified copy of the order before him. Thereafter, he will place the enquiry report before the competent authority for taking appropriate decision in next two weeks. If the enquiry has not been concluded within two months, the petitioner will be deemed to be in service and the suspension would be revoked automatically.

¶9

It is made clear that if the petitioner does not cooperate in the enquiry, the enquiry officer would be at liberty to proceed ex-parte also. "

¶10

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

¶11

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 party to comply with the aforesaid order of the writ Court within six weeks from the date of production of a copy of this order.

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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 party within the stipulated time as aforementioned.

¶15

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.

¶16

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerised copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶17

Order Date :- 13.7.2020 A.K.Srivastava

Rishipal Singh v. Parthsarthi Sen Sharma, the Commissioner, Gram Vikas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rishipal Singh v. Parthsarthi Sen Sharma, the Commissioner, Gram Vikas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gaurav Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ram Chandra Bhartiya Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Km. Renu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Committee of Management Sriram Janki Sanskrit Uttar Madhyama Vidyalay and Another Vs Pramod Kumar, Deputy Director Education (Sanskrit) Directorate and Another

Smt. Vandana Thakur Vs Shri Rahul Kumar, Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate

Jitendra Kumar Vs Ashwani Kumar Awasthi, Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Government of U.P. and Another