Dismissed

Shiv Kumar @ Shiv Kumar Yadav v. Shri Nitish Kumar, D.M., Ayodhya

Allahabad HC4 Sept 2024/2501/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt application alleging wilful disobedience of a writ order, the Court held that once the respondent authority decided the applicant's representation in pursuance of the writ court direction, the dishonesty allegation could not be adjudicated, rendering the application infructuous.

What did the court decide?

Order under Section 12 dismissed as infructuous.

Shiv Kumar @ Shiv Kumar Yadav Vs Shri Nitish Kumar… — Contempt of Court | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:60760

¶2

Court No. - 17

¶3

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2501 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Shiv Kumar @ Shiv Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- Shri Nitish Kumar, D.M., Ayodhya Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Kumar Verma

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Standing Counsel.

¶7

This application under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act has been filed alleging wilful disobedience of the judgment and order dated 17.07.2023 passed on Writ-C No. 9323 of 2019.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the representation of the applicant has again been rejected in stereo type manner and, therefore, the order of the writ Court has not been complied with in letter and spirit.

¶9

On the other hand, Shri Amrendra Singh, learned Standing Counsel, while placing written instructions dated 06.07.2024, informs that there was a direction of the writ Court to decide the representation of the applicant afresh, which has been decided by the respondent on 05.07.2024. It is also submitted that the merits of the order cannot be adjudicated in the contempt proceedings. It is, thus, submitted that as the order of the writ Court has been complied with, this application has lost its efÏcacy and may be dismissed.

¶10

The aforesaid written instruction is taken on record.

¶11

Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant, learned Standing Counsel and going through the order of the writ Court as well as contents of the written instructions, it is evident that the representation of the applicant has been decided in pursuance of the order of the writ Court. Admittedly, the veracity of the decision

¶12

taken by the respondent-authority cannot be considered in the contempt proceedings.

¶13

In view of above, the application stands dismissed as infructuous.

¶14

However, it is always open to the applicant to ventilate his grievance, if any, before the appropriate forum.

¶15

Order Date :- 4.9.2024 VKS

¶16

Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shiv Kumar @ Shiv Kumar Yadav v. Shri Nitish Kumar, D.M., Ayodhya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Kumar @ Shiv Kumar Yadav v. Shri Nitish Kumar, D.M., Ayodhya

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Genda Vati Vs Sh. Amrendra K. Sengar Commissioner of Police Lucknow and Others

Dr. Ram Vishal Tiwari and Another vs Smt. Leena Johry, Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Ayush, Govt. of U.P., Civil Secrtt., Lko. and Others

Nitin Bansal Vs Sri Sanjay R Boosreddy Chairman U.P. Real Estate Regulatory Authority and 4 Others

Mohit Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko and Another

Hari Ram Gupta vs Sri Raj Kumar, Director Panchayati Raj, U.P. Lko.

Alka Devi vs Shri Pratap Singh Baghel, Secy. U.P. Basic Shiksha Parishad Prayagraj and Another