Dismissed¶17

Sushil Kumar Gautam v. Sri Abhishek Singh, Director, Training U.P. Lko.

Allahabad HC18 Nov 2025CAPL/1833/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 8, Manish Kumar J. - CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. 1833 of 2025 - Sushil Kumar Gautam versus Sri Abhishek Singh, Director, Training U.P. Lko. - decided 18 November 2025 - contempt application dismissed; compliance with writ judgment and order dated 13.02.2025 held complete via order dated 18.07.2025 passed on applicant's representation; notice discharged. Keywords: contempt civil application, compliance of writ court order, representation, respondent No. 2, Uttar Pradesh.

What did the court decide?

The writ court's direction extended only to taking a decision on the applicant's representation and passing an appropriate order. ¶13

Sushil Kumar Gautam Vs Sri Abhishek Singh, Director, Training U.P. Lko. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1833 of 2025

Sushil Kumar Gautam

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

Sri Abhishek Singh, Director, Training U.P. Lko.

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishek Dwivedi, Pradeep Chandola Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :

¶8

Court No. - 8

¶9

HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J.

¶10

1. Heard.

¶11

Learned State Counsel on the basis of instructions received has submitted that an order dated 18.07.2025 has been passed on the representation of the applicant in compliance of the judgment and order dated 13.02.2025 passed in the writ petition. The photocopy of the same has been provided during the course of argument, which is taken on record. A photocopy of the order has been provided to the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the order has been passed is not tenable in the eyes of law and the same has not been decided in accordance with law.

¶13

After hearing the learned counsel parties and going through the record of the case, the direction by the writ court was only to take a decision on the representation of the applicant and pass a appropriate order. The relevant portion of the judgment and order dated 13.02.2025 is quoted herein below:-

¶14

"17. In this regard, the petitioner is given liberty to submit a fresh representation within two weeks form today and on submission of which, respondent No. 2 is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders within six weeks thereafter in accordance with law."

¶15

CAPL No. 1833 of 2025

¶16

¶17

As such, after taking a decision in passing the order dated 18.07.2025 on the representation of the applicant, the judgment and order passed in the writ petition has been complied with. Hence the present contempt application is dismissed .

¶18

Notice, if any, is hereby discharged.

¶19

(Manish Kumar,J.)

¶20

November 18, 2025

¶21

Preeti

¶22

Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sushil Kumar Gautam v. Sri Abhishek Singh, Director, Training U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushil Kumar Gautam v. Sri Abhishek Singh, Director, Training U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Poonam Dubay @ Tiwari Vs Pranjal Tripathi, in Charge Tehsildar, Tehsil Lambhua, Sultanpur

Abood Raza vs Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Distt. Inspector of Schools, Raebareli and Another

Krishna Kumar vs Shri Ajay Chauhan the Prin. Secy. P.W.D. Lko. and 2 Others

Ashok Kumar Singh Vs Prabhat Singh, Sub Divisional Magistrate Jaisinghpur District Sultanpur and Another

Smt. Renu Mishra Vs Sri Ranveer Prasad Prin. Secy. Food and Civil Supplies Lko. and Another

Anil Kumar Vs Dr. Pankaj Tripathi, Director of Agriculture Krishi Bhawan Lko.