Disposed

Ramji v. Sri T. Venktesh, Principle Secretary, Ministry of Irrigation and 3 Others

Allahabad HC17 Dec 2020CAPL/1764/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil contempt application for non-compliance with a 2019 writ order, the High Court found a prima facie case but granted an ex-parte one-month extension. The court directed service of this order and awarded liberty to file a fresh application if compliance fails.

What did the court decide?

Granted two months extension to comply with prior order; liberty to file fresh application in case of default.

Ramji Vs Sri T. Venktesh, Principle Secretary, Ministry… — Contempt of Court | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1764 of 2020 Applicant :- Ramji Opposite Party :- Sri T. Venktesh, Principle Secretary, Ministry Of Irrigation And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Pratap Singh

¶3

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

¶5

By order dated 08.3.2019 passed in Writ A No.44985 of 2003 filed by the applicant, the Court directed as under:

¶6

"8. In view thereof, aforesaid order of reversion is patently illegal being in violation of principles of natural justice and cannot be sustained.

¶7

The writ petition is allowed. Impugned order dated 18.09.2003 (Annexure 1 to the writ petition) is hereby set aside. Petitioner shall be entitled to all consequential benefits.

¶8

However, this order shall not preclude the respondents from passing fresh orders in accordance with law."

¶9

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.

¶10

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 two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

¶11

The applicant shall supply a duly stamped registered envelope addressed to the opposite party and another selfaddressed stamped 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 party within one week thereafter and keep a recorded thereof.

¶12

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

¶13

With the aforesaid observations, this application is

¶14

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 petitioners 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 computerized 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 :- 17.12.2020 RKP

Ramji v. Sri T. Venktesh, Principle Secretary, Ministry of Irrigation and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramji v. Sri T. Venktesh, Principle Secretary, Ministry of Irrigation and 3 Others

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

Babu Nandan Vs Sri Dinesh Mishra, S.D.M. and 3 Others

Mohd. Firoz Vs Praveen Kumar Tiwari, District Basic Education Officer

Ratnesh Yadav Vs Raj Kumar Vishwakarma Chairman and Another

Manti Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Raj Kumar Ojha and Another Vs Sri Ajay Chaurasiya, Upayukt

mohammad yakub Vs suhas l.y., collector/ district magistrate and another