Ravindra Pratap Singh and Others Vs Shri Narendra Dev Pandey, District-Inspector of Schools, District-Bahraich

Court No. - 17

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 249 of 2024

Applicant :- Ravindra Pratap Singh And Others Opposite Party :- Shri Narendra Dev Pandey, District-Inspector Of Schools, District-Bahraich Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Verma

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶5

1. Heard.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant placed order dated 9.9.2024 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.20843 of 2024, in which, request was made to the Division Bench to consider the interim relief application of the respondent within six weeks from the date of order and till the said period of six weeks, contempt proceedings be kept in abeyance, as a result, order dated 11.9.2024 was passed by this Court.

¶7

The Order dated 11.9.2024 passed by this Court reads as under :

¶8

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants.

¶9

2. The present application has been filed with the prayer to summon and prosecute the respondents for wilful and deliberate defying of the order dated 19.04.2023 passed by the Writ Court in Writ A No.2937 of 2023.

¶10

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the grievance of the applicant was not being ventilated, as a result, Writ A No.2937 of 2023 was filed which was allowed on 19.04.2023 with the following order: "Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶11

The issue raised in the present petition is similar to the one decided by this Court in Writ - A No.1674 of 2023 (Shyam Ji Tiwari and 2 Ors. v. State of U.P. & 4 Ors.) on 22.02.2023.

¶12

Thus, following the said judgment and on the same analogy, the present petition also deserves to be decided in a similar manner. Thus, the writ petition is allowed.

¶13

The benefits as accorded to the petitioners of Writ - A No.1674 of 2023 shall flow in favour of the present petitioners also."

¶14

4. Operative portion of order dated 22.02.2023 passed in Writ A No.1674 of 2023 mentioned in order dated 19.04.2023 is as under: "Thus, the inescapable conclusion from the averments made in the writ petition and the stand taken by the State in the instructions, there is a deemed approval of the appointment of the petitioners made by the Selection Committee under Section 16FF of the Act and therefore, they are entitled to payment of their salary since the date of appointment. The arrears of the salary shall be computed and paid to the petitioners within a period of four months and the petitioner shall continue to get their salary as and when the same falls due in terms of the mandate of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act.

¶15

The writ petition is allowed in terms of the said order. "

¶16

5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the aforesaid order was passed in the presence of learned State Counsel even then, the order was served on the authorities, but the same was not complied

¶17

with, as a result, present application was filed, thereafter, the notice was served on the respondents on 19.01.2024. He further submits that the order of Writ Court was also challenged in Special Appeal Defective No.861/2023 but till today, the delay has not been condoned.

¶18

6. On 10.07.2024 and 29.07.2024, following orders were passed: Order dated 10.07.2024

¶19

"1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Standing Counsel.

¶20

2. This application under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act has been filed alleging wilful disobedience of the judgment and order dated 19.04.2023 passed on Writ-A No. 2937 of 2023.

¶21

3. As per office report dated 23.02.2024 based on the report of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bahraich dated 21.02.2024, notice is already served on the respondent personally. However, till today, no affidavit of compliance has been filed by the respondent.

¶22

4. Shri Amrendra Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel informs that the order of the writ Court is already challenged in special appeal, however, he concedes the fact that no interim order has been passed in the said special appeal.

¶23

5. List this case on 29.07.2024 at 11.30 a.m.

¶24

6. By the next date of listing, respondent shall file affidavit of compliance, failing which, he shall appear before this Court." Order dated 29.07.2024

¶25

"1. Heard.

¶26

2. Learned counsel for the applicants prays for and is permitted to implead Mr. Manoj Kumar Ahirwar, District Inspector of Schools, Bahraich as respondent no.2, forthwith.

¶27

3. Shri Amrendra Pratap Singh, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents has filed applications on behalf of respondent no.1 for exemption from personal appearance and discharge of contempt notice, which are taken on record. Both the said applications stands allowed. Respondent no.1 shall appear on the next date.

¶28

4. Shri Amrendra has also filed an application duly sworn by Mr. Manoj Kumar Ahirwar (respondent no.2) for grant of time and submits that special appeal against the order of the Writ Court is pending, hence, contempt proceeding may be deferred.

¶29

5. As merely on the basis of pendency of special appeal filed against the order of the Writ Court, there is no ground for deferring the contempt application. Accordingly, request made for grant of time is refused and the said application filed for seeking grant of time is also rejected.

¶30

6. List this case on 23.08.2024 at 11:30 A.M.

¶31

7. By the next date of listing, respondent no.2 shall file affidavit, failing which, he shall appear in person before this Court for framing of charge. "

¶32

7. It is evident from the order sheet that on 23.08.2024, request was made to defer the present contempt proceeding on the ground that against the order dated 29.07.2024, SLP was preferred before the Hon'ble Apex Court.

¶33

8. Today, order dated 09.09.2024 passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave Petition No.20843 of 2023 is placed before this Court in which, Hon'ble Apex Court has declined to interfere in the order dated 29.07.2024 passed by this Court but the contempt proceeding has been deferred for the period of two weeks for pursuing the special appeal.

¶34

9. Accordingly, list this case on 18.11.2024 at 11:30 AM.

¶35

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that efforts are not being made by the respondent as well as State authorities for disposal of the interim relief application pending in the Special Appeal before the Division Bench.

¶36

Considering the contents of the order passed by the writ court as well as order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 9.9.2024 in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.20843 of 2024 requested for deferment made by counsel for the respondent is hereby, rejected.

¶37

6. List this case on 18.7.2025.

¶38

In case, by the next date of listing, affidavit of compliance is not filed by the respondent No.2, D.I.O.S., Bahraich, he shall appear before this Court for the purposes of framing of charge.

¶39

Order Date :- 20.5.2025 GauraV/-

¶40

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ravindra Pratap Singh and Others v. Shri Narendra Dev Pandey, District-Inspector of Schools, District-Bahraich

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravindra Pratap Singh and Others v. Shri Narendra Dev Pandey, District-Inspector of Schools, District-Bahraich

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Euphoria Sports City Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Its Authorised Signatory Lokesh Kumar Vs Pranjal Yadav Secy. Deptt. of Infrastructure and Industrial Development Govt. of U.P.

C/M Shanti Niketan Vidya Madir Pipri Karukhar Mall Lko. Thru. Its Manager Shri Ajit Kumar Singh Vs Shri Ram Pravesh, District Basic Education Officer Lko.

Union of India through the G.M. North Central Railway Vs Sri Jitendra Kuamr Chaudhary

Smt. Manisha Nigam vs Somanshu Nigam

Badri Prasad Mishra vs Shri Onkar Rana, District Inspector of Schools, Pratapgarh

Rakesh Kumar Bindal Vs Sri Suresh Babu, Prin. Secy. Co-Operative Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others