Satyavrat Pathak v. Dr. Nitin Bansal Commissioner and Another
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court directed the respondent to be issued notice to explain why contempt proceedings should not be initiated for alleged willful disobedience of a specific order.
What did the court decide?
Issue notice to respondent nos. 1 and 2 to explain as to why contempt proceedings be not initiated.
What the court decided
Court No. - 17
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4537 of 2024
Applicant :- Satyavrat Pathak Opposite Party :- Dr. Nitin Bansal Commissioner And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Madhav Chaturvedi
Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.
Issue notice to respondent nos. 1 and 2 to explain as to why contempt proceedings be not initiated against them for alleged willful disobedience of the order dated 02.09.2024 passed in Writ A No. 7220 of 2024.
As prayed, steps be taken within seven days.
List this case in the week commencing 20.01.2025, as fresh.
Office is directed to submit service report by the next date of listing.
Order Date :- 28.11.2024 Ashish
Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Satyavrat Pathak
- respondent
Dr. Nitin Bansal
Coram
Manish Kumar
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · November
- Registered
- Case no.
- CAPL/4537/2024
All orders in this case
2 orders share this CNR
- Order 1 — this page · Jaspreet Singh
- Order 2 · Jaspreet Singh
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Jang Bahadur and Another Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation, Lucknow and Others
Pyare Lal Pandey Memorial Inter College, Sitapur Thru. Its Manager Alok Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Secondary Education, Lucknow and Others
Smt. Aneeta Maurya Vs State of U.P. Thru. District Magistrate, Rae Bareli and 3 Others
Shree Nath vs State of U.P. Thru. District Magistrate, Amethi and Others