Dismissed

Vivek Verma v. Nand Lal, Distt. Panchayat Raj Officer Distt. Shrawasti

Allahabad HC11 Dec 2025CAPL/2994/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt application alleging non-compliance of a writ court order directing payment of the admitted amount. The court found payment of the amount admitted after inquiry had been made, held the order complied with, and dismissed the contempt application as infructuous.

What the court decided

AI extract

Vivek Verma vs Nand Lal, Distt. Panchayat Raj Officer… — Contempt of Court | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2994 of 2025

Vivek Verma

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

Nand Lal, Distt. Panchayat Raj Officer Distt. Shrawasti .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sachin Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :

¶7

Court No. - 8

¶8

HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J.

¶9

The present contempt application has been preferred against the alleged non-compliance of judgement and order dated 10.12.2024, the relevant Para of the order is quoted hereinbelow:

¶10

"4. In view of the said statement, the present petition is disposed off directing the respondent to ensure the payment as may be admitted by the respondents within a period of six weeks from today. "

¶11

Learned Standing counsel on the basis of the instruction received from the respondent has submitted that the payment which is admitted after the inquiry has already been paid to the applicant, hence the judgement and order passed passed by the writ court has been complied with and the contempt application is liable to be dismissed.

¶12

On the other hand learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that out of the admitted amount of Rs.7,52,180/-, about Rs.1,30,000/- has only been paid, so the judgement and order passed by the writ court has not been complied with. Even the admitted amount has not been paid to the applicant and for showing the admitted amount to the respondent the applicant has relied upon a document which is at Page No.38 of the paper book.

¶13

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record of the case including the instructions forwarded by the respondent, it is found that the writ Court while disposing of the writ petition had

¶14

CAPL No. 2994 of 2025

¶15

¶16

directed the respondent to ensure the payment as may be admitted by the respondents, and if the applicant is still aggrieved, he may approach the Court again.

¶17

On being asked from the learned counsel for the applicant, what does the respondent mean in the order passed by the writ court, he has replied that the respondent referred therein is the District Panchayat Raj Officer i.e. respondent in the present contempt application.

¶18

The document which has been shown by the learned counsel for the applicant in support of his submission alleging that the admitted amount of Rs.7,52,180/- was not passed by respondent i.e. District Panchayat Raj Officer. It is a letter under the signature of Assistant Development Officer and consulting Engineer to the respondent and thereafter an enquiry was made and thereafter the amount was paid, which is not disputed by the applicant, so the document relied upon by the applicant is not a document which could be said that it is an admitted amount by the respondent in the present contempt applicant.

¶19

Apart from above, the writ court has given liberty to the applicant that if he still aggrieved, he may approach this Court again. Therefore, he may avail the remedy as may be permissible under the law.

¶20

In view of the facts, circumstances and discussion made hereinabove, the judgment and order passed by the writ court has been complied with and the contempt application has become infructuous and it is dismissed as such.

¶21

The notice, if any, issued against the respondent stands discharged.

¶22

(Manish Kumar,J.)

¶23

December 11, 2025

¶24

S. Kumar

¶25

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

Vivek Verma v. Nand Lal, Distt. Panchayat Raj Officer Distt. Shrawasti

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Vivek Verma v. Nand Lal, Distt. Panchayat Raj Officer Distt. Shrawasti

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

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

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