Dismissed¶13

Smt. Yashmati v. Dr. Raj Kumar, Chief Medical Officer, Ambedkar Nagar

Allahabad HC12 Feb 2025CAPL/1128/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt application (civil) dismissed as infructuous; alleged non-compliance of judgment/order dated 01.08.2022 in Writ A No. 4764 of 2022 (direction to CMO, Ambedkar Nagar to decide representation dated 12.6.2019 with reasoned speaking order in six weeks); compliance effected via undated order; liberty to file fresh writ petition; notice discharged; applicant Smt. Yashmati; opposite party Dr. Raj Kumar; judge Manish Kumar; order date 12.2.2025; neutral citation 2025:AHC-LKO:9129.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition dismissed as infructuous; applicant left free to avail remedies permissible under law (including filing a writ petition against the decision on her representation); earlier notice, if any, discharged. ¶13

Smt. Yashmati Vs Dr. Raj Kumar, Chief Medical Officer, Ambedkar Nagar — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether the judgment and order dated 01.08.2022 passed in Writ A No. 4764 of 2022 had been complied with, such that the contempt application alleging its non-compliance needed no further pursuit.

¶9

Court's answer

Since compliance had been effected (the representation having been decided) and counsel for the applicant conceded the petition had become infructuous, this Court dismissed the contempt petition as infructuous, leaving the applicant free to avail remedies permissible under law, including challenging the decision taken on her representation by filing a writ petition.

¶13

Ratio / Principle

Any notice issued earlier in the contempt proceedings stood discharged.

¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench (Court No. 17) - CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. 1128 of 2024, decided 12.2.2025 by Hon'ble Manish Kumar, J. Applicant Smt. Yashmati moved for contempt proceedings against Dr. Raj Kumar, Chief Medical Officer, Ambedkar Nagar, for alleged non-compliance of the judgment and order dated 01.08.2022 passed in Writ A No. 4764 of 2022, wherein the writ petition had been disposed of with direction to the CMO to decide her representation dated 12.6.2019 with a reasoned and speaking order within six weeks. Learned Standing Counsel reported that the representation had been decided by the respondent through an undated order, taken on record during argument. Counsel for the applicant conceded the contempt petition had become infructuous and sought liberty to challenge that decision by a fresh writ petition. Accordingly, the Court dismissed the contempt petition as infructuous, held it open to the applicant to avail remedies permissible under law, and discharged any earlier notice. Neutral Citation No. 2025:AHC-LKO:9129.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:9129

¶2

Court No. - 17

¶3

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1128 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Smt. Yashmati

¶5

Opposite Party :- Dr. Raj Kumar, Chief Medical Officer, Ambedkar Nagar

¶6

Counsel for Applicant :- Prabhakar Tiwari,Ashwini Kumar Tripathi,Vikas Chaturvedi

¶7

Counsel for Opposite Party :- Shiv Kumar Mishra,Phool Badan Singh,Ram Nath Pandey

¶8

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶9

The present contempt application has been preferred for alleged non compliance of the judgment and order dated 01.08.2022 passed in Writ A No. 4764 of 2022. The relevant extract of the same is quoted hereinbelow:-

¶10

"4. Accordingly, without entering into merit of the case, present writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.2-Chief Medical Officer, Ambedkar Nagar to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 12.6.2019 as contained as Annexure No.3 to the writ petition with reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law, expeditiously, say within a period of six weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him and communicate the decision to the petitioner."

¶11

Learned Standing Counsel on the basis of instructions received has submitted that in compliance of the judgment and order dated 01.08.2022, the representation of the application has been decided by the respondent by its undated order, the copy of which has been provided during course of argument (which is taken on record) and the photocopy of the same has been provided to the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant has very fairly submitted that for all practical purposes, the present contempt petition has become infructuous and the same may be dismissed as infructuous but liberty may be given to the applicant to challenge the decision taken by the respondent on the representation of the applicant by filing a writ petition.

¶13

In view of above, the present contempt petition is dismissed as infructuous and it is always open for the applicant to avail the remedy, as may be permissible under law.

¶14

Notice issued earlier, if any, stands discharged.

¶15

Order Date :- 12.2.2025 Nitesh

¶16

Digitally signed by :- NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt. Yashmati v. Dr. Raj Kumar, Chief Medical Officer, Ambedkar Nagar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Yashmati v. Dr. Raj Kumar, Chief Medical Officer, Ambedkar Nagar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Maharoon Nisha Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Vikram Maurya and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Shesh Ram Nishad and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Chandrika Prasad Vs Shri Ravindra Kumar Dir. Pension U.P. Ifmtr Lko.

Naresh Kumar Mishra Vs Shri Vidya Sagar Mishra, Superintendent of Police Rampur and Another

Prem Pal Singh Vs Atal Kumar Rai, Director Panchayatrai, Lko.