Akhand Prakash Tripathi Vs Shri Deepak Kumar, Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Secondry Education U.P., and Others

Court No. - 8

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2012 of 2024

Applicant :- Akhand Prakash Tripathi Opposite Party :- Shri Deepak Kumar, Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Secondry Education U.P., And Others

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Pranshul Tripathi,Ishan Baghel,Pranshul Tripathi,Sumedha Sen,Umang Rai

¶5

. Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri M. K. Jauhari for the respondent Shri Pawan Kumar Tiwari, District Inspector of Schools, Ayodhya (respondent No.5).

¶7

A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had passed a detailed order dated 02.05.2025 which reads as under:-

¶8

"1. The present contempt application is filed with the following prayer :

¶9

"This Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to summon the Opposite Parties/Contemnors and punish them for deliberately, intentionally and wilfully committing contempt of this Hon'ble Court by disobeying the order dated 23.02.2023 passed in Writ A no.7696 of 2012 (Akhand Prakash Tripathi Vs. State of U.P. and others) contained as Annexure no.2 herein to present contempt petition."

¶10

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that similarly situated person, namely, Kailash Nath Dubey has been given all the benefits vide order dated 18.06.2024. He further submitted that in the case of present applicant, the order of the writ Court has been challenged by the State before the Division Bench in Special Appeal Defective No.458 of 2024. It is undisputed by the learned counsel for the parties that on 27.08.2024, two weeks time was granted to the applicant (respondent in the appeal) by the Division Bench for filing objection to the delay condonation application. The objection to the delay condonation application was filed by the applicant in the aforesaid appeal on 12.12.2024. The Division Bench vide order dated 12.12.2024 has observed that the applicant (respondent in the appeal) will not press the contempt proceeding till the next date of hearing in this case and the

¶11

special appeal was directed to be listed in second week of January, 2025. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for applicant that the said appeal was listed on 27.01.2025 but the same is not being pursued by the State Government.

¶12

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that as the applicant is suffering from paralysis therefore, mere pendency of the defective special appeal, contempt proceedings may not be deferred. He, therefore, requested that the respondent no.5 may be summoned and punished accordingly.

¶13

4. As it is evident from the order dated 12.12.2024 passed by Division Bench in Special Appeal that the applicant was directed not to press the contempt proceedings till the next date of listing i.e. 27.01.2025 and the fact that the applicant is suffering from paralysis therefore, mere pendency of defective Special Appeal, the present contempt proceedings cannot be deferred.

¶14

5. List this case on 22.05.2025. By the next date of listing, Sri Pawan Kumar Tiwari, District Inspector of Schools, district Ayodhya-respondent no.5 is directed to file affidavit of compliance at par with the similarly situated person, namely, Kailash Nath Dubey, failing which he shall appear before this Court for the purposes of framing of charge."

¶15

In furtherance of the said order, Shri Pawan Kumar Tiwari, District Inspector of Schools, Ayodhya is present in Court. However, it is noticed that he is most inappropriately dressed to appear before the Court of law especially while he is facing contempt charges. This face was put to the counsel for the respondent no.5 though he expressed his apology and submitted that despite informing the respondent no.5 has appeared casually. This Court does not appreciate moreover in which the respondent no.5 has appeared before this Court and accordingly for this folly, he is saddled with the cost of Rs.5000/- to be paid through his own salary account with the Mediation & Conciliation Center of this Court by 26th of May, 2025.

¶16

A specific query was put to the counsel for the respondent no.5 as to whether the affidavit of compliance has been filed, to which it has been informed that the affidavit of compliance has not been filed. Shri Jauhari, counsel for the respondent no.5 has attempted to argue that the order passed by the writ court of which enforcement is

¶17

being sought in contempt proceedings, is the subject matter of a delayed intra court appeal pending before the Division Bench of this Court.

¶18

It has also been informed that the said appeal was listed yesterday, however, could not be taken up and it is further submitted that an application for disposal of interim relief has been moved today. It is thus urged that some time be granted.

¶19

Having considered the aforesaid submissions of Shri Jauhari, this Court finds that the same is baseless; inasmuch as the Court in its earlier order dated 02.05.2025 had taken note of this aspect and despite noticing that the intra court appeal filed by the respondent is beyond the prescribed period of limitation and is delayed by more than a year and quarter and apart from the fact that the delay has yet not been condoned and the fact still remains that even if the respondent has moved an application before the Division Bench as stated by him seeking disposal of the application for interim relief, as per law the same would not be considered unless the delay is condoned.

¶20

It has also been informed and as evident from the order dated 02.05.2025 that the objections of the petitioner against the delay condonation had already been filed on 12.12.2024 and despite six months, there has been no persuasion at the behest of the respondent in regard to the said appeal.

¶21

Be that as it may, the fact remains that the order passed by the writ court has not been complied with. No affidavit of compliance has been filed. The respondent is inappropriately dressed and that in itself is a cause of concern as it depicts how the respondent no.5 views the solemnity of the court proceedings.

¶22

This Court in the aforesaid circumstances finds that it is clear that the order of the writ court has remained uncomplied till date hence prima cacies contempt is made out. Accordingly the Court in presence of Pawan Kumar Tiwari has framed the charge as under:-

¶23

"Shri Pawan Kumar Tiwari, District Inspector of School, Ayodhya, respondent no.5 is charged and is called upon to furnished his reply as to why you should not be punished for deliberate and wilful disobedience of the order passed by the writ Court dated 23.02.2023 in Writ-A No.7696 of 2012"

¶24

Let the response be filed within ten days.

¶25

List this matter on 2nd of July, 2025, on which date, the respondent no.5, Shri Pawan Kumar Tiwari shall again appear in person to answer the charge and in case if the answer is not appropriately explained, the Court shall proceed to pass appropriate orders.

¶26

O rder Date :- 22.5.2025 ank

¶27

Digitally signed by :- ALI NEWAZ KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Akhand Prakash Tripathi v. Shri Deepak Kumar, Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Secondry Education U.P., and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akhand Prakash Tripathi v. Shri Deepak Kumar, Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Secondry Education U.P., and Others

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

Jitendra Kumar Vs Shri Surendra Kumar Tiwari, Secy. Basic Shiksha Parishad U.P. Prayagraj

Veer Prakash Awasthi and 2 Others Vs Shri Rajiv Kumar Srivastava Addl. General Manager / Unit Head Iti Ltd. Raibareli and Another

Smt. Manju Sharma Vs Dr. Nitin Bansal, Commissioner Trade Tax Deptt. Lko.

Murtaza Husain Khan Vs Mohd. Inamullah

Mohd.Jalil Vs Shia Central Board of Waqf

Girish Chandra Tripathi Vs Pawam Kumar and Others