Disposed

Manoj Datt Dubey v. Sri Lalit Kumar Verma, Chief Conservator of Forest/Field Director, Lakhimpur Kheri and Another

Allahabad HC26 Sept 2024CAPL/2143/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt application, the Court addressed the non-compliance by State officers of a prior Writ Court order directing equivalent pay scale payments. Rejecting arguments for deferment based on policy formulation or pending appeals, the Court summoned the respondent for framing of charges.

What did the court decide?

Notice dated to appear on 26.9.2024 for framing of charges.

Manoj Datt Dubey vs Sri Lalit Kumar… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 7

¶2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2143 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Manoj Datt Dubey Opposite Party :- Sri Lalit Kumar Verma, Chief Conservator Of Forest/Field Director, Lakhimpur Kheri And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Tushar Bhushan

¶4

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Tushar Bhuhsan, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Aniruddha Singh on behalf of the opposite parties.

¶6

In the present contempt petition the petitioner has alleged non compliance of the order of this Court dated 29.2.2024 passed in Writ A No.1579 of 2024 whereby Chief Conservator of Forrest/Field Director, Dudhwa Tiger Reserve, Lakhimpur Kheri was directed to pay minimum of pay scale as applicable to the regular employees working on equivalent posts and the said direction was to be complied within a period of six weeks from the date of service of a certified copy of the said order on the opposite parties.

¶7

Compliance of the order of the Writ Court having not been made, this Court had issued notices to the opposite parties. In pursuance of the notice issued by this Court, an application for deferment of the contempt proceedings was filed stating that the respondents have taken decision to file special appeal. The said application was also rejected vide order dated 26.7.2024 after holding that mere decision to file special appeal cannot be a ground for non - compliance of the order of the Writ Court and accordingly again respondent No. 2 was directed to file affidavit of compliance failing which he was directed to appear before this Court.

¶8

Today, opposite party No.2 has neither appeared in person nor filed affidavit of compliance and again application for deferment of the contempt petition has been filed. In the said application for deferment, there is no indication that there is any inclination of the opposite parties to comply with the order of the Writ Court. It has been submitted that the matter has been placed before the Government for formulation of a policy in this regard.

¶9

Considering the averments made in the application, this Court is of the considered view that the direction of the Writ Court ought to have been complied with in letter and spirit. It is further noticed that the orders of this Court are not subjected to approval by the State Government nor subjected to any policy

¶10

to be formulated by the State Government and accordingly the arguments in this regard are also rejected.

¶11

This Court takes a serious note of the fact that even the previous directions of this Court have not been complied with as neither has affidavit of compliance been filed nor has opposite party No.2 appeared in person nor has even an application for exemption from personal appearance been filed. All the officers of the State Government are under a mandate to comply with the order of the High Court, failing which this Court has sufficient powers under Article 215 of the Constitution of India and the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act to proceed against such officers. From the language of the affidavit which has been filed today, it is clear that there is no inclination on part of opposite party No.2 to comply with the direction of this Court. Accordingly the affidavit filed today is also rejected.

¶12

In the aforesaid circumstances, let opposite party No.2 appear before this Court on the next date for framing of charges.

¶13

List on 26.9.2024.

¶14

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶15

Order Date :- 17.9.2024 RKM.

¶16

Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Manoj Datt Dubey v. Sri Lalit Kumar Verma, Chief Conservator of Forest/Field Director, Lakhimpur Kheri and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Datt Dubey v. Sri Lalit Kumar Verma, Chief Conservator of Forest/Field Director, Lakhimpur Kheri and Another

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

Pushpendra Pratap Singh and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy./Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Sushila Devi vs Mr. Ajay Kumar Saini Addl. Commissioner Admin. Ayodhya Division Ayodhya and Another

Ram Prakash vs Rajshree, Distt. Horticulture Officer, Distt. Sitapur

Santosh Kumar and Others vs Sri Ramesh Singh, Distt. Inspector of Schools, Ballia

Aakash vs Dr. Rangaraju T., Deputy Director, Dudhwa Tiger Reserve, Lakhimpur Kheri

Rajendra Kumar vs Sri Akhilesh Pratap Singh, Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikarie, Sitapur