Dismissed¶¶10

Vinay Kumar v. Atul Kumar Tiwari, Basic Siksha Adhikari, Gonda U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Jul 2025CAPL/1981/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt Application (Civil) No. 1981 of 2025; Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, Court No. 8; decided 12 December 2025 by Manish Kumar, J.; applicant Vinay Kumar (counsel Neel Kamal Mishra); opposite party Atul Kumar Tiwari, Basic Siksha Adhikari, Gonda U.P. (counsel Uday Veer Singh); writ court judgment and order compliance conceded; dismissed as infructuous; notice, if any, discharged.

What did the court decide?

Dismissal of the contempt application as infructuous; discharge of notice, if any. ¶¶10

Vinay Kumar vs Atul Kumar Tiwari, Basic Siksha Adhikari, Gonda U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1981 of 2025

Vinay Kumar

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

Atul Kumar Tiwari, Basic Siksha Adhikari, Gonda U.P.

¶7

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Neel Kamal Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Uday Veer Singh
Court No.- 8

¶8

HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J.

¶9

After arguing at some length, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the judgment and order passed by Writ Court has been complied with and for all practical purposes, the present contempt petition has become infructuous and the same may be dismissed as infructuous.

¶10

As such, the present contempt application is dismissed as infructuous.

¶11

Notice, if any, is hereby discharged.

¶12

December 12, 2025 mks

¶13

(Manish Kumar,J.)

¶14

Digitally signed by :- MANISH SAXENA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Vinay Kumar v. Atul Kumar Tiwari, Basic Siksha Adhikari, Gonda U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinay Kumar v. Atul Kumar Tiwari, Basic Siksha Adhikari, Gonda U.P.

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

Juvenile X Thru. His Natural Guardian /Mother Y Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Mohd. Shan Saleem Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Balram Krishna Vs State of U.P. Thru Sec. Home Deptt. and Another

Diksha Singh Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Uma Shankar Jaiswal Vs the State of U.P and Anr.

Hans Raj and Ors. Vs the State of U.P and Anr.