Dismissed¶9

Sarita Kumar @ Sarita v. Smt. Jigyasa Raj Chief Executive Officer Cantonment Board Faizabad

Allahabad HC8 Sept 2025CAPL/2050/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Manish Kumar J., 08.09.2025 — Contempt Application (Civil) No. 2050 of 2025, Sarita Kumar @ Sarita v. Smt. Jigyasa Raj, Chief Executive Officer, Cantonment Board Faizabad. Contempt proceedings for compliance with a writ court judgment dismissed as infructuous after compliance affidavit (filed 06.08.2025) enclosing decision on representation dated 23.07.2025; notice discharged; liberty reserved to applicant to seek appropriate legal remedy.

What did the court decide?

Contempt application dismissed as infructuous; notice, if any, discharged; applicant at liberty to seek appropriate remedy under law, including challenging the decision taken on her representation dated 23.07.2025. ¶9

Sarita Kumar @ Sarita Vs Smt. Jigyasa Raj Chief Executive Officer Cantonment Board Faizabad — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2050 of 2025

¶3

Sarita Kumar @ Sarita

¶4

	Versus .....Applicant(s)
Smt. Jigyasa Raj Chief Executiv Cantonment Board Faizabad	e Officer .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Akhilendra Kumar Goswami : Sanjeev Singh, Sanjeev Singh

¶5

Court No. - 17

¶6

HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J.

¶7

Compliance affidavit in the present case has been filed on 06.08.2025 enclosing therewith the copy of the decision taken on representation of the applicant dated 23.07.2025 in compliance of the judgment and order of the Writ court.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has very fairly submitted that the judgment and order passed by the writ court has been complied with and for all practical purposes, the present contempt application has rendered infructuous and the same may be dismissed as infructuous with liberty to challenge the decision taken on representation of the applicant.

¶9

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

¶10

Notice issued, if any, stands discharged.

¶11

It is always open for the applicant, if she has any grievance, to seek appropriate remedy as may be permissible under the law as for that, no separate order is required by this Court.

¶12

(Manish Kumar,J.)

¶13

September 8, 2025

¶14

Ashish

¶15

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sarita Kumar @ Sarita v. Smt. Jigyasa Raj Chief Executive Officer Cantonment Board Faizabad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarita Kumar @ Sarita v. Smt. Jigyasa Raj Chief Executive Officer Cantonment Board Faizabad

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

Ashok Kumar Singh and Another Vs Sri Dilip Kumar Sarkar Superintending Engineer P.W.D. Lko.

Ravindra Swaroop Vs Smt. Pramita Singh, Executive Officer Nagar Palika Parishad Bahraich

Smt. Kamlesh Vs Shri Anand Prakash Rai, Naib Tehsildar, Amaniganj Tehsil Miklipur Dist. Ayodhya

Baldev Sharan Singh Thru. Power of Attorny Holder Umesh Pratap Singh vs Anjani Kumar Singh and Another

Rajendra Prasad Yadav vs Sri Ranveer Mishra, Divisional Forest Officer Social Forestry Amethi

Mohan Lal vs Shri Santosh Kumar Sinha, Addl. General Manager/Unit Head Iti Ltd. Mankapur Gonda and Another