Rudra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. / Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Urban Development Lko and 3 Others

Allahabad HC24 Sept 2024WRIA/8408/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge granted stay on a recovery notice dated 21.08.2024, noting its similarity to previously stayed notices. The court directed the executing officer to appear for explanation and listed the case alongside a pending writ.

What did the court decide?

Stayed impugned recovery notice dated 21.08.2024 until further orders.

What the court decided

Rudra Pratap Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. /… — Contempt of Court | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8408 of 2024

¶3

Petitioner :- Rudra Pratap Singh

¶4

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. / Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Urban Development Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhisar Dev,Ashutosh Chaubey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Prem Prakash Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned State Counsel for opposite parties no.1 to 3 and Mr. Prem Prakash Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.4.

¶7

Petition has been filed challenging order dated 21.08.2024 initiating recovery against petitioner on the basis of allegations levelled against him.

¶8

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the impugned notice is in fact the IIIrd notice and earlier notice had been issued to petitioner on 17.06.2023 and 28.11.2023 which were identical to the impugned notice and had been stayed by this Court vide order dated 09.01.2024 passed in Writ A No.149 of 2024 which is still pending consideration.

¶9

Prima facie, upon perusal of impugned notice as compared to earlier two notices and the order dated dated 09.01.2024, it appears that despite order dated 09.01.2024 staying earlier notices dated 17.06.2023 and 28.11.2023, the Official concerned has again passed the impugned notice whichever noted copy of the earlier two notices.

¶10

Prima facie the passing of impugned order appears to be contemptuous in nature.

¶11

List this case on 04.10.2024, as fresh alongwith Writ A No.149 of 2024.

¶12

Opposite party no.4 i.e. Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Mishrit Naimisharanya, Sitapur passed the impugned order is directed to appear before this Court to explain the reasons for passing of the impugned order despite interim protection granted to petitioner.

¶13

Until further order of this Court, the impugned recovery notice dated 21.08.2024 shall remain stayed.

¶14

Order Date : - 24.9.2024 Subodh/-

¶15

Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rudra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. / Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Urban Development Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Rudra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. / Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Urban Development Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mithlesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Archana Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Others

Shubham Kumar Gond Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko and Another

Yatindra Shukla vs Shri Manvendra Swarup, Secy. Commi./ Board of Management Dayanand College of Law Kanpur and Others

Jitendra Kumar Sharma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Amma Lal Verma @ Amba Lal Verma and 4 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another