Allowed

Salam Ahmad v. Anil Kumar Pathak, Tehsildar

Allahabad HC11 Aug 2021CAPL/286/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt application regarding non-compliance with a prior writ court order, the court determined that a pending revision filed by the respondent no longer obstructed compliance. The court directed the Tehsildar to comply with the impugned order expeditiously within six weeks and granted liberty for fresh application in case of default.

What did the court decide?

Respondent directed to comply with order dated 07.01.2019 within six weeks; liberty to applicant for fresh application on default.

Salam Ahmad Vs Anil Kumar Pathak, Tehsildar — Contempt of Court | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 4

¶2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 286 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Salam Ahmad Opposite Party :- Anil Kumar Pathak, Tehsildar Counsel for Applicant :- Nayab Ahmad Khan

¶4

Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri K.R. Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for opposite party. The applicant has preferred the present contempt application for non-compliance and willful disobedience of the judgement and order dated 07.01.2019 passed in Writ C No.189 of 2019 (Salam Ahmad Vs. State of U.P. and others).

¶6

Pursuant to the order of this court, an affidavit of compliance has been filed by Sri K.R. Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel on behalf of opposite party. In paragraph 8 of the compliance affidavit, it is stated that during the pendency of the recall application, one of the parties preferred revision Being Revision No.Rev./759/2019/ Azamgarh having Computer Case No.R2019150600759 (Kamar Vakar Vs. Salam Ahmad) under Section 219 of U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act in which notices were issued by the Board of Revenue on 29.05.2019. Since records were summoned by the Board of Revenue, no decision was taken by the opposite party pursuant to the order passed by this Court dated 07.01.2019.

¶7

Today when the matter is taken up, it is informed by learned counsel for the applicant that the revision pending before the Board of Revenue has already been decided on 18.02.2021.

¶8

In this view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that there is absolutely no hurdle for the opposite party to decide the recall application as directed by this Court vide its judgment

¶9

and order dated 07.01.2019.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶11

In the facts and circumstances of the case, this contempt application is disposed of directing the Opposite Party or the person who is presently holding the post of Tehsildar, Tehsil Lalganj, District Azamgarh shall comply with the order of Writ Court dated 01.01.2019 in its letter and spirit expeditiously and preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of presentation of a copy of this order before him.

¶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

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.

¶14

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.

¶15

Order Date :- 11.8.2021

¶16

saqlain

Salam Ahmad v. Anil Kumar Pathak, Tehsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salam Ahmad v. Anil Kumar Pathak, Tehsildar

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

Arvind Singh and 2 Others Vs Kaushal Raj Sharma D.M

Subedar Ram and Another Vs Civil Judge and 2 Others

Smt Savita Devi Vs Surendra Bahadur Singh,Superintending Engineer, Nalkoop Division and Another

Surya Narayan Dubey Vs Jai Prakash Dubey and Another

Dr Pramod Kumar Singh Vs Shri Prashant Trivedi, Additional Chief Secretary/Principal Secretary Medical Education

Naresh Pal Vs Ashutosh Bhardwaj, Deputy Director of Education ( Secondary)