Dismissed

Gyanu Sharma v. Matam Venkata Rao, Chief Manager Central Bank of India, Mumbai and Others

Allahabad HC13 Nov 2024/3340/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt application seeking enforcement of a writ direction to decide a representation against Central Bank of India. A compliance affidavit enclosed the bank's decision dated 03.09.2024 rejecting the claim. The court held the order had been complied with and dismissed the contempt petition as infructuous.

What did the court decide?

None granted; contempt application dismissed as infructuous, earlier notices discharged.

Gyanu Sharma Vs Matam Venkata Rao, Chief Manager Central… — Contempt of Court | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:74987

¶2

Court No. - 17

¶3

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 3340 of 2024 Applicant :- Gyanu Sharma Opposite Party :- Matam Venkata Rao, Chief Manager Central Bank Of India, Mumbai And Others

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Dwijendra Prasad Gupta,Smt. Manorama Bajpai Counsel for Opposite Party :- Gopal Kumar Srivastava Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶5

The present contempt application has been preferred for compliance of the judgement and order dated 29.04.2024, whereby this Court has issued direction to opposite parties to decide the representation of the petitioner. The relevant portion of the direction issued in Writ-A No.3308 of 2024 is quoted herein-below:-

¶6

"In view of above, without entering into the mertis of the case, the opposite parties is directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 30.1.2024 within a period of eight weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is placed before him.

¶7

With the aforesaid observations, instant writ petition is hereby disposed of."

¶8

A compliance affidavit has been filed by Manoj Kumar Saxena, Regional Manager, Central Bank of India, i.e., respondent No.2 enclosing therein the order dated 03.09.2024 deciding the representation of the applicant in compliance of the judgement dated 29.04.2024.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that while taking the decision on the representation of the petitioner, certain wrong facts have been mentioned and rejected the claim.

¶10

Such disputed questions could not be seen in the contempt proceedings and if the applicant is aggrieved by the order dated 03.09.2024 rejecting the claim of the applicant, he may avail the remedies as may be permissible under the law.

¶11

In view of the facts and discussions made herein-above, the judgement dated 29.04.2024 has been complied with and for all practical purposes, the present contempt petition has become infructuous and accordingly, the contempt application is dismissed as infructuous.

¶12

Notice issued earlier, if any, stand discharged.

¶13

Order Date :- 13.11.2024 Ashutosh

¶14

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Gyanu Sharma v. Matam Venkata Rao, Chief Manager Central Bank of India, Mumbai and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gyanu Sharma v. Matam Venkata Rao, Chief Manager Central Bank of India, Mumbai and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Deena Nath Pathak and Others vs Smt. Monika Rani, D.M., Bahraich

Manjula Chaurasiya vs Rajesh Kumar Srivastava, Distt. Inspector of Schools, Muzaffarnagar

Kaushlya vs Sri Pradeep Kumar Singh, Tehsildar, Tehsil Milkipur, Ayodhya

Mohammad Javed and 5 Others vs Shri Prathmesh Kumar Vice Chairman Lucknow Development Authority Lko.

Vishram vs Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Lko.

Ashwani Singh @ Ashwani Kumar Singh vs Narendra Kumar Singh, M.D. U.P. Upbhokta Sahkari Sangh Ltd., Lko. and Another