Dismissed

Upma Chaudhary and Ors. v. Smt. Renuka Kumar Addl. Chief Secretary Revenue Deptt.

Allahabad HC8 Nov 2023CAPL/2172/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt application filed for non-implementation of a Writ Court order regarding the disposal of a representation by officers of the UP Education Department, the Court admitted the disposal of the underlying issue by the respondents and rejected the application. The contempt petition was dismissed. No substantive legal principle is discussed and no reasoning is provided.

What did the court decide?

The contempt petition is dismissed. Notices, if any, stand discharged.

Upma Chaudhary and Ors. Vs Smt. Renuka Kumar… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:74136

¶2

Court No. - 4

¶3

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2172 of 2019

¶4

Applicant :- Upma Chaudhary And Ors. Opposite Party :- Smt. Renuka Kumar Addl. Chief Secretary Revenue Deptt. Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar,Mohammad Ishtiyaq,Mohd. Waris Farooqui

¶5

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶6

1. Heard.

¶7

2. Sri Sunil Bajpai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has drawn attention of this Court towards order of the Writ Court dated 07.05.2019 passed in Writ Petition (S/S) No.13007 of 2019, which reads as under:-

¶8

"Heard Sri Arvind Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶9

Notices on behalf of opposite party Nos.1 & 2 have been accepted by the office of the learned Chief Standing Counsel, Sri Manish Mishra, Advocate has accepted notice on behalf of opposite party No.4, Sri Shivam Sharma, Advocate has accepted notice on behalf of opposite party No.7, while Sri Ajay Kumar, Advocate has accepted notices on behalf of rest of the opposite parties.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioners after arguing the matter at length has submitted that for redressal of their grievances, one representation dated 02.04.2018 has been preferred by the petitioners to the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Basic Education, Government of U.P., Civil Secretariat, Lucknow, (opposite party No.1), which is contained as Annexure No.3 to the writ petition, but as per learned counsel for the petitioners, the said representation has yet not been decided by the authority concerned.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioners has prayed that ends of justice would suffice if necessary direction for disposal of the aforesaid representation of the petitioners is issued to the authority concerned within a stipulated time.

¶12

Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents has submitted that all the requisite exercise for selection in question has already been completed, therefore, the present petitioners are not entitled for any reliefs.

¶13

Considering the innocuous prayer of learned counsel for the petitioners, without entering into the merits of the issue, the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Basic Education, Government of U.P., Civil

¶14

Secretariat, Lucknow, (opposite party No.1), is hereby directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 02.04.2018 (registered postal receipt has also been enclosed), which is contained as Annexure No.3 to the writ petition, strictly in accordance with law by speaking and reasoned order, with expedition preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of the certified copy of this order.

¶15

In view of the aforesaid terms, the writ petition is disposed of finally."

¶16

3. Sri Sunil Bajpai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has provided the copy of instructions letter dated 17.10.2023 to the Court preferred by the Principal Secretary of the Department addressing to the Chief Standing Counsel enclosing therewith the copy of office memo dated 17.10.2023 whereby the representation of the petitioners has been decided by the Principal Secretary in terms of order of the Writ Court. The instructions letter dated 17.10.2023 along with its enclosures is taken on record.

¶17

4. Sri Sunil Bajpai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel may provide the copy of the office memo dated 17.10.2023 to the learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶18

5. In the wake of aforesaid development, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the instant contempt petition.

¶19

6. Accordingly, the instant contempt petition is dismissed.

¶20

7. Notices, if any, stand discharged.

¶21

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶22

Order Date :- 8.11.2023 Suresh/

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Upma Chaudhary and Ors. v. Smt. Renuka Kumar Addl. Chief Secretary Revenue Deptt.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Upma Chaudhary and Ors. v. Smt. Renuka Kumar Addl. Chief Secretary Revenue Deptt.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sattira Devi Vs Bal Krishan Executive Engineer Vidyut Vitran KHAND-1 Madh

Jugal Kishore Vs Sri Bhuvnesh Kumar Prin.Secy.Technical Edu. Lucknow and Anr.

Gyan Singh Chandel and Others Vs Dr. Sudhir M. Bobday and Others

Suresh Chand Sharma Vs Sri Raj Pratap Singh Addl. Chief Secy. Basic Education Civ

Fazal Ahmad Usmani Vs Smt. Monika S. Garg, Addl. Chief Secy. / Prin. Secy. Minorities Welfare, Lko. and Others

Danish Mehmood Vs Smt. Monika S. Garg, Addl. Chief Secy. / Prin. Secy. Minorities Welfare, Lko. and Others