In a contempt application regarding disobedience of a writ order, the applicant was informed that the underlying writ order had been complied with. The court found no cause of action and dismissed the application as infructuous.
The contempt application was dismissed as being infructuous due to compliance with the impugned order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 4
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1066 of 2021
Applicant :- Ravindra Singh Yadav Opposite Party :- Anjali Agarwal, D.B.E.O. Counsel for Applicant :- Awadh Narain Rai
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
The applicant is before this Court for a direction to initiate contempt proceeding against the opposite party for wilful disobedience of the order dated 17.12.2019 passed in Writ A No.19765. The operative portion of the order is reproduced hereibelow :-
"Heard Sri Awadh Narain Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 1 and Sri Suresh Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4.
The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition with the prayer to quash the order dated 11.09.2019 passed by the Block Education Officer/respondent no. 4.
A preliminary objection has been raised by Sri Suresh Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4 that by the order dated 11.09.2019 only recommendation has been made by the respondent no. 4 and no final decision has been taken by him. As such the present writ petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable. It is further argued by him that pursuant to the aforesaid recommendation two notices namely the notice dated 05.10.2019 as well as 25.10.2019 have been issued by the District Basic Education Officer, District Kasganj to the petitioner.
It is argued by Sri Awadh Narain Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner that the reply to both the notices has already been submitted by the petitioner but till date no final decision has been taken in this regard.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is disposed of finally directing the respondent no. 2 to take a final decision in the matter as per the procedure prescribed in law, expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order."
Today when the matter is taken up, it is informed by learned counsel for the applicant that the order passed by the writ court has already been complied with, therefore, no cause of action remained survive and prays that the present application be dismissed as infructuous.
In view of the same, the present contempt application is dismissed as infructuous.
Order Date :- 29.7.2021 Pramod Tripathi
Ravindra Singh Yadav
Prakash Padia
Pramod Tripathi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
