Dismissed

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

Allahabad HC1 Jul 2024CAPL/2501/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant filed a contempt application alleging non-compliance with a writ court order regarding a representation. The respondent demonstrated that the representation had been decided afresh as directed. The court dismissed the application as infructuous, holding that the merits of the decision could not be adjudicated in contempt proceedings.

What the court decided

AI extract

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 efficacy 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 the court decided

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

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

Baba Vishwanath Shivphool Shikshan Sewa Sansthan Thru. Its Manager Sumit Singh and Another vs Dr. Alok Kumar, Secy. U.P. State Medical Faculty Lko.

Pankaj Kumar Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Another

Pradeep Kumar vs Sri L Venkteshwarlu, Prin. Secy. Transport, Civil Secrtt. Lko.

Ganga Ram Vs Hardwari Lal

Sachin Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Up Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Sant Raj and Others Vs Brajesh Upadhyay, Pracharya, Distt. Institute of Education and Training, Aalapur, Ambedkarnagar