Dismissed

Dr. Uma Gupta v. Sri Awadesh Kumar Tiwari, Secy. Basic Education Shiksha ANUBHAG-1, Lko.

Allahabad HC14 Aug 2024CAPL/3210/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On a contention by the applicant that the respondent failed to provide documents in deciding a representation, this Court held that the impugned writ order directed only the decision of the claim, not the provision of documents. Finding no non-compliance, the contempt petition was dismissed as infructuous.

What did the court decide?

the contempt petition is dismissed as infructuous and notice, if any, is discharged.

Dr. Uma Gupta vs Sri Awadesh Kumar Tiwari, Secy. Basic… — Contempt of Court | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 17

¶2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 3210 of 2024 Applicant :- Dr. Uma Gupta Opposite Party :- Sri Awadesh Kumar Tiwari, Secy. Basic Education Shiksha Anubhag-1, Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Km. Vishwa Mohini,Rajesh Kumar,Vimal Kumar Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶3

Learned counsel for the respondent has filed an affidavit of compliance, which is taken on record.

¶4

Learned Standing Counsel has submitted that in compliance of the judgment and order dated 30.05.2024 passed in Writ A No. 4076 of 2024, the decision has been taken on the representation of the applicant by passing an order dated 03.09.2024. Copy of which has been enclosed as annexure no. A-1 to the compliance affidavit.

¶5

On the other hand, learned Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the judgment and order dated 30.5.2024 has not been complied with as the documents to be provided by the respondents, as directed by the Court are not provided by the respondents while deciding the representation .

¶6

The said submission made by learned counsel for the applicant is not acceptable as there is no direction by the Writ Court for providing or not to provide the documents as desired by the applicant in his representation. The only direction was that to decide the claim of the applicant dated 30.04.2024. For convenience, the relevant extract of the said judgment is being quoted herinbelow:-

¶7

"In view of above and without entering into the merits of the case, the opposite party no. 2 is directed to consider and decide the claim dated 30.4.2024 of the petitioner appended as Annexure-4 along with the writ petition within a period of six weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him.

¶8

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed off."

¶9

In view of the above, the contempt petition has become infructuous and the same is dismissed as infructuous.

¶10

Notice issued, if any, stands discharged.

¶11

The applicant is at liberty to avail the remedy as may be permissible under the law.

¶12

Order Date :- 23.10.2024/Ashish

¶13

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dr. Uma Gupta v. Sri Awadesh Kumar Tiwari, Secy. Basic Education Shiksha ANUBHAG-1, Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Uma Gupta v. Sri Awadesh Kumar Tiwari, Secy. Basic Education Shiksha ANUBHAG-1, Lko.

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

Ram Ji Gaud S/O Shiv Kumar Gaud M/S Ramji Gaud Kalin Boonkai Vs the Prescribed Authority Under the Minimum Wages Act 1948/

M/S Arihant Infra Realtors Private Limited Thru. Authorised Signatory Vs Yogesh Srivastava

Anamika Sugar Mills Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Chief General Manager Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Sugar Industries and Cane Developemt

Sahab Deen vs A.D.J-13, Lucknow, District-Lucknow and 57 Others

Aakash Singh vs Addl. Prin. Judge IV Lko and Another

Sudama @ Premawati vs Shri Satyendra Kumar, D.M., Barabanki