Hansa Ram v. Mr. Ajay Chauhan, Prin. Secy., Public Works Deptt., Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC24 May 2024CAPL/1031/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt application alleging disobedience of a writ court order staying the applicant's transfer-cum-attachment. The State claimed the writ order was unclear and sought time; the court rejected that claim, holding no clarification was needed, and directed respondent no. 2 to appear with the applicant's salary slip.

What the court decided

AI extract

Hansa Ram Vs Mr. Ajay Chauhan, Prin. Secy., Public Works… — Contempt of Court | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 8

¶2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1031 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Hansa Ram

¶4

Opposite Party :- Mr. Ajay Chauhan, Prin. Secy., Public Works Deptt., Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amrendra Nath Tripathi,Akash Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- Neel Kamal Mishra

¶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 19.02.2024 passed on Writ-A No. 246 of 2024.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that transfercum-attachment order dated 12.12.2023 passed by the State Government was challenged by the applicant by means of Writ-A No. 246 of 2024 (supra), in which, interim order was passed on 19.02.2024. It is further submitted that as per the tracking record of the post office, the aforesaid order was delivered on the respondent on 23.02.2024, but till today, no formal order has been passed by respondent no. 1 in compliance of the order of the writ Court. It is, thus, submitted that the respondent may be summoned and punished for wilful disobedience of the order of the writ Court in accordance with law.

¶9

Notices were issued in the present contempt proceedings on 06.03.2024 and, thereafter, it was informed that applicant has been attached in the office of the Engineer-in-Chief. This Court vide order dated 27.04.2024, while fixing the matter for today, directed the respondent no. 1-Mr. Ajay Chauhan, Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, Lucknow to file affidavit of compliance explaining that as to how many officials have been attached and as to how the salary is being paid to the

¶10

applicant.

¶11

Order dated 27.04.2024 is as under:

¶12

"1. List this case on 13.05.2024.

¶13

On the next date, respondent no.1 shall file affidavit of compliance as well as explain that how many officials have been attached and how the salary is being paid to the applicant. He shall also place the provisions related to the attachment, failing which, respondent no.1 shall appear in person before this Court."

¶14

Today, Shri Sunil Bajpayee, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel places 3 applications along with affidavit duly sworn by respondent no. 1, i.e., Exemption Application, Application for grant of time to file affidavit of compliance and Application for taking on record the short counter affidavit.

¶15

The ground taken in the exemption application is that due to his personal work, the Officer is on leave, however, he is ready to appear before this Court on any other date.

¶16

In view of above, the exemption application stands allowed.

¶17

It is evident from the affidavit filed in support of the application for grant of time to file affidavit of compliance that the time has been sought on the ground that the order of the writ Court is unclear and, therefore, the State is unable to pass appropriate order.

¶18

It is very disappointing that the State Government has a full fledged legal department having Principal Secretary (Law) and several Law Officers including the Advocate General for smooth functioning of the State, but in the affidavit, the Officer holding the post of Principal Secretary has stated that order passed by the writ Court is unclear.

¶19

In view of above, the application for grant of time is hereby rejected.

¶20

In the short counter affidavit, it is mentioned that the order of the writ Court is not clear, therefore, clarification application has been filed in the aforesaid Writ-A No. 246 of 2024.

¶21

It is evident from the order of the writ Court dated 19.02.2024 that the impugned transfer order dated 12.12.2023 of the applicant has been stayed, meaning thereby, the status prior to passing of the said order dated 12.12.2023 will prevail and no such clarification is needed.

¶22

In view of above, short counter affidavit filed by respondent no. 1 is also hereby rejected.

¶23

List this case on 17.05.2024 at 11.30 a.m.

¶24

On the next date, respondent no. 2-Mr. Vinod Kumar Srivastava, Engineer-in-Chief (Development) & Head of Department/Rural Road, Public Works Department, U.P., Lucknow shall appear before this Court along with the salary slip of the applicant and also to explain that whether any post, on which, the applicant is working, is available in his office or not.

¶25

Order Date :- 13.5.2024 VKS

¶26

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

Hansa Ram v. Mr. Ajay Chauhan, Prin. Secy., Public Works Deptt., Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Hansa Ram v. Mr. Ajay Chauhan, Prin. Secy., Public Works Deptt., Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shashank Mishra Vs Sri Dr. Vinod Kumar Singh Registrar Lucknow University Lko.

Harihar Prasad Maurya Vs Dr. Bijendra Singh, Vice Chancellor, Narendra Dev University of Agriculture/Technology Ayodhya

Pradeep Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Suraj Pal Vs Ramratan Gupta

Ram Kishore @ Jugadi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home , Lucknow

Abhaya Pratap Singh vs Sri Amit Tripathi, Nayab Tehsildar, Tehsil-Sadar, Lko.