Disposed

Smt Nimisha Sen Srivastava v. Mr Surendra Tiwari

Allahabad HC4 Oct 2024CAPL/6422/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge, while noting that the earlier Writ order mandated compliance and that the department's latest order failed to decide the claim, directed the District Basic Education Officer to take a decision within two weeks. Non-compliance may lead to contempt proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Directed the District Basic Education Officer, Jhansi, to take appropriate decision on the applicant's claim within two weeks.

Smt Nimisha Sen Srivastava vs Mr Surendra… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 6422 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Smt Nimisha Sen Srivastava Opposite Party :- Mr Surendra Tiwari Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.

¶5

Shri Bhaskar Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, the counsel for the applicant is present.

¶6

In pursuance to the previous order passed by this Court, Shri Yatindra, Advocate representing the opposite party has obtained instructions in the matter and on the basis of his instructions, states that the order dated 04.11.2024 has been passed by the Secretary, Uttar Pradesh, Basic Education Board, Prayagraj directing the District Basic Education Officer, Jhansi to proceed in the case of the applicant in accordance with law and the relevant service rules.

¶7

The order dated 04.11.2024 has been handed over to the Court which is taken on record.

¶8

The order dated 04.11.2024 does not show that the claim of the applicant has been decided and the matter has been left to the District Basic Education Officer, Jhansi for appropriate action.

¶9

The order passed by this Court in Writ - A No. 693 of 2024 compels all the State Authorities to comply with the same and any act or omission on the part of any officer which results in noncompliance or disobedience of the order would amount to contempt of court making the concerned officers liable to be prosecuted and punished in contempt.

¶10

The District Basic Education Officer, Jhansi is directed to take appropriate decision on the claim of the applicant as directed by the Writ Court in its order dated 29.01.2024 and as also directed by

¶11

the Secretary, Uttar Pradesh, Basic Education Board in his order dated 04.11.2024 within two weeks from today.

¶12

List again on 28th November, 2024 amongst the top ten cases showing the name of Shri Yatindra, the counsel for the opposite party on which date the District Basic Education Officer, Jhansi shall either file a compliance affidavit showing full compliance of the order passed by the Writ Court or shall be personally present in the Court for framing of charges.

¶13

A copy of this order be communicated to the District Basic Education Officer, Jhansi by the Registrar (Compliance) within 24 hours.

¶14

Order Date :- 5.11.2024 Vipasha

¶15

Digitally signed by :- VIPASHA MUKHERJEE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt Nimisha Sen Srivastava v. Mr Surendra Tiwari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Nimisha Sen Srivastava v. Mr Surendra Tiwari

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

Smt Pushpa Devi vs Dhruv Tiwari, Prescribed Authority/Mact

Amrish Kumar Mishra vs Sri Kaushik Ganguli, District Inspector and Another

Amrit Lal Patel vs Sri Digvijay Singh, S.D.M. and Another

Raghav Gupta vs Shri Manish Kumar Verma District Magistrate and Another

Jai Kishun Prasad vs Ravindra Singh, Dios

Smt. Rajkumari Sachan and Another vs Sri Mandan Singh Garbyal,Vice Chairman