Dismissed

Durga Prasad v. Sri Anirudh Kumar Yadav Tehsildar Tehsil Sadar Distt. Bahraich

Allahabad HC11 Dec 2025CAPL/2246/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt application for alleged non-compliance of a writ court order directing expedition of Section 67 U.P. Revenue Code proceedings. The court was told compliance orders were passed and counsel conceded an alternative statutory remedy under Section 214 read with Para 460 of the Revenue Court Manual; the application was dismissed as devoid of merit.

What the court decided

AI extract

Durga Prasad Vs Sri Anirudh Kumar Yadav Tehsildar Tehsil… — Contempt of Court | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2246 of 2025

Durga Prasad

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

Sri Anirudh Kumar Yadav Tehsildar Tehsil Sadar Distt. Bahraich .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Onkar Nath Pandey, Devendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :

¶7

Court No. - 8

¶8

HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J.

¶9

The present contempt application has been preferred against alleged non-compliance of judgement and order dated 9.7.2024 whereby the writ court has directed to expedite the hearing of the proceedings filed under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.

¶10

Learned Standing Counsel has submitted that the compliance affidavit has been filed on 21/ 22.08.2025 enclosing therein the copies of the order dated 14.08.2025 passed in two cases filed under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and has submitted that the judgment and order passed by the writ court has been complied with.

¶11

On the other hand learned counsel for the applicant is unable to dispute the submission made by learned Standing Counsel, but he has submitted that only the notices were issued to the encroachers and the encroachment is still there.

¶12

At this stage, learned Standing Counsel has submitted that the applicant/ petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy to move an application under Section 214 of U.P. Revenue code, 2006 read with para 460 of U.P. Revenue Court Manual to remove the encroachment.

¶13

On being asked from the learned counsel for the applicant whether the remedy is available with applicant to move an application for execution / implementation of order under Section 214 of U.P. Revenue code, 2006 read with Para 460 of U.P. Revenue Court Manual, he has very fairly submitted that in case the order is not implemented, the remedy is available with him as stated above.

¶14

CAPL No. 2246 of 2025

¶15

¶16

In view of above facts and circumstances, the present contempt application is devoid of merits and is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶17

(Manish Kumar,J.)

¶18

December 11, 2025

¶19

S. Kumar

¶20

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

Durga Prasad v. Sri Anirudh Kumar Yadav Tehsildar Tehsil Sadar Distt. Bahraich

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Durga Prasad v. Sri Anirudh Kumar Yadav Tehsildar Tehsil Sadar Distt. Bahraich

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Madan Pal Vs Shri Akhilesh Pratap Singh, Distt. Basic Education Officer, Sitapur

Rashmi Singh and Others Vs Shri Ramit Sharma, Commissioner of Police, Prayagaraj and Others

Smt. Ram Dulari Vs Smt. Neha Awasthi, Chairman, Nagar Palika Parisad, Sitapur and Another

Satyendra Vikram Singh and Ors. Vs v.K.Pandey Director of Educationsecondary Edu. Lko and Anr.

Pavan Kumar Vs Smt. Stuti Kakkar the Secy. Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment New Delhi and Others

Yashwant Ram Vs Shri Rajiv Kumar Srivastava Addl. Gen. Manager / Unit Head Iti Ltd. Raibareli and Another