Disposed

Gajendra Singh Negi and 2 Others v. Vinit Singhal, Executive Engineer Nirman Khand 20, U.P. Awas Avam Vikas Parishad and Another

Allahabad HC5 Mar 2020CAPL/88/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this contempt application, the applicant sought to initiate proceedings against respondents for disobeying an interim order halting demolition. The court found no demolition occurred after the order was served and noted the compounding application was rejected. Consequently, no interference under the Contempt of Courts Act was required.

What did the court decide?

Contempt application disposed; notice, if any, stands discharged.

Gajendra Singh Negi and 2 Others Vs Vinit Singhal… — Contempt of Court | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 36

¶2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 88 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Gajendra Singh Negi And 2 Others Opposite Party :- Vinit Singhal, Executive Engineer Nirman Khand 20, U.P. Awas Avam Vikas Parishad And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ved Prakash Mishra,Om Prakash Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- Navaneet Chandra Tripathi

¶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 05.11.2019 passed in Writ-C No.35561 of 2019 (Gajendra Singh Negi And 2 Others v. State of U.P. & Ors.). For ready reference, the relevant extract of order dated 05.11.2019 is quoted as under:-

¶7

"Sri S.K. Mishra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents- 2 and 3, seeks 24 hours' time to file counter affidavit in the writ petition.

¶8

The petitioners have challenged the order dated 3.10.2019 whereby the respondents have asked them to get the alleged unauthorized construction demolished, failing which the construction will be demolished.

¶9

It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have moved an application for compounding the alleged illegal construction and the said application is still pending before the respondents and no order has been passed therein.

¶10

We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶11

Put up this case as fresh on 21.11.2019 before appropriate Bench.

¶12

Until further order of the Court, no demolition shall be carried out pursuant to the impugned order."

¶13

The matter was taken up on 09.01.2020 and on the said date the Court has proceeded to pass following order:-

¶14

"Learned counsel for the applicant to serve notice on Sri Navneet Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the U.P. Awas Avam Vikas Parishad, Kanpur Nagar.

¶15

Put up this matter as fresh on 11.02.2020 showing the name of Sri Navneet Tripathi as counsel for the opposite party.

¶16

In the mean time, Sri Tripathi to seek instructions."

¶17

On the matter being taken up today, Shri Naneet Tripathi, learned counsel for the opposite party has filed has affidavit indicating therein that so far as the interim order dated 05.11.2019 is concerned, the same has not been flouted as

¶18

certain demolition has taken place on 31.10.2019 and the moment, the interim order has been brought into the notice of the opposite party, the Authority has refrained themselves from the site. He further submits that so far as the compounding application is concerned, the same has been rejected.

¶19

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court is of the considered opinion that no interference is required under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 as no demolition has been carried out since passing of the interim order.

¶20

With these observations, the Contempt Application is disposed of . Notice, if any, stands discharged.

¶21

Order Date :- 5.3.2020 A. Pandey

Gajendra Singh Negi and 2 Others v. Vinit Singhal, Executive Engineer Nirman Khand 20, U.P. Awas Avam Vikas Parishad and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gajendra Singh Negi and 2 Others v. Vinit Singhal, Executive Engineer Nirman Khand 20, U.P. Awas Avam Vikas Parishad and Another

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

Veer Singh Vs Sri Raj Krishan Maurya, Settlement Officer Consolidation , Badaun

Naveen Kumar Vs Prem Prakash Mida, S.D.M.

Heera Lal Sahu Vs Ram Ratan and 3 Others

Asmat Jahan Vs Devendra Swaroop, District Basic Education Officer

Committee of Management, Kisan Vidhyapeeth Inter College Vs Shri. Vinay Kumar Pandey, Director of Education (Secondary), U.P. and Another

Bharat Lal Vs Mr. Gaurav Srivastava, S.D.M. Sadar