Kamana Singhal v. Surendra Tiwari, Secretary, Basic Education Board

Allahabad HC19 Dec 2024CAPL/7802/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this contempt application, the applicant complained that the opposite party failed to implement a previous writ order concerning a transfer dispute. The court found a prima facie case for willful disobedience and issued notice to the opposite party to appear personally and submit an affidavit.

What did the court decide?

Opposite party issued notice to appear personally within one month with affidavit explaining non-compliance.

Kamana Singhal vs Surendra Tiwari, Secretary, Basic… — Contempt of Court | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 2

¶2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 7802 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Kamana Singhal Opposite Party :- Surendra Tiwari, Secretary, Basic Education Board

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Bindeshwari Prasad Mishra

¶5

Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second contempt application for willful disobedience of the writ Court's order dated 12.01.2024 passed in Writ A No. 13804 of 2023, in which the following order was passed:

¶8

" 1. Heard Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned counsel for petitioner and Mrs. Archana Singh, Advocate for respondents.

¶9

2. Petitioner has filed an application for inter-district transfer in terms of transfer policy for Session 2023-24 on ground of marriage also. No decision has been communicated to petitioner, however, learned counsel for petitioner submits that probable reason not to consider the application of petitioner may be that she has already taken benefit of inter-district transfer during earlier transfer policy but at that time she was not married.

¶10

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that there is no specific bar that second application for inter-district transfer cannot be considered and petitioner has a subsequent reason also which squarely falls within the parameters of extra weightage marks.

¶11

4. Learned counsel appearing for respondents fairly submits that case of petitioner will be considered if already not considered and a reasoned decision thereof in terms of transfer policy will be communicated to petitioner within a period of three weeks from today and application of petitioner will not be rejected only on the ground that it is a second application.

¶12

5. In view of above and taking note of fair submission made by learned counsel for respondents, the writ petition is disposed of with observation that concerned authority will take a reasoned decision on petitioner?s application for inter-district transfer in terms of transfer policy and communicate the same to petitioner within three weeks from today and will not reject her application only on the ground that it is a second application."

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that when the writ Court's order was not complied with, the applicant was constrained to file Contempt Application (Civil) No. 1788 of 2024, which was

¶14

disposed of by granting one more opportunity of three months to the opposite party to comply with the writ Court's order, but in spite of the opportunities having being granted to the opposite party, neither the order of writ Court, nor the order of this Court has been complied with till date. Therefore, the opposite party has wilfully not complied with the orders and, thus, liable for punishment under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

¶15

From the perusal of the records of the case, a prima facie case for contempt is made out against the opposite party.

¶16

Issue notice to the opposite party returnable within period of one month.

¶17

On the date fixed, the opposite party shall remain personally present before this Court to show as to why the contempt proceedings may not be initiated against the opposite party along with an affidavit explaining therein as to how many contempt proceedings have been initiated against them so far for noncompliance of orders passed by the Court and their outcome.

¶18

List on the date fixed in the notice.

¶19

The Registrar (Compliance) of this Court is directed to communicate this order to the opposite partywithin 24 hours from today.

¶20

Order Date :- 19.12.2024 Pravesh Mishra

¶21

Digitally signed by :- PRAVESH KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kamana Singhal v. Surendra Tiwari, Secretary, Basic Education Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamana Singhal v. Surendra Tiwari, Secretary, Basic Education Board

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

Anita Rathi vs Shri Deepak Meena

Mahendra Pal Sharma vs Ashish Kumar Goel, Chairman, U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. and Another

Ram Siya vs Sri Narendra Kumar Singh

Om Prakash vs Sadanand and Another

Smt. Madhuri Devi vs Shri Shambhoo Kumar, Managing Director and Another

Kamlakar Singh vs Prabhu Narayan Singh, Cane Commissioner, Uttar Pradesh