Dismissed¶12

Mahesh Kumar v. Smt. Harshita Mathur, the D.M./the V.C. Raebareli Development Authority Raebareli

Allahabad HC11 Nov 2025CAPL/3020/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Contempt Application (Civil) 3020 of 2025; Manish Kumar, J.; decided 11 November 2025; applicant Mahesh Kumar; respondent Smt. Harshita Mathur, DM/VC Raebareli Development Authority; compliance affidavit; decision dated 16.10.2025 on representation; compliance with writ petition judgment order; contempt dismissed as infructuous; notice discharged; liberty to seek remedy/file writ petition; counsel Vaibhav Srivastava (applicant), Chandan Mishra (respondent).

What did the court decide?

Contempt application dismissed as infructuous; notice, if any, discharged; applicant left free to avail whatever remedy is permissible under law if still aggrieved. ¶12

Mahesh Kumar Vs Smt. Harshita Mathur, the D.M./the V.C. Raebareli Development Authority Raebareli — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Contempt application dismissed as infructuous; notice, if any, discharged; applicant left free to avail whatever remedy is permissible under law if still aggrieved.

¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether the contempt application should be dismissed as infructuous in view of the compliance affidavit and the decision dated 16.10.2025 taken on the applicant's representation, while preserving liberty to the applicant whose whole claim remained undecided.

¶11

Court's answer

In view of the reported compliance (compliance affidavit filed by respondent no.1 and the decision dated 16.10.2025 taken on the applicant's representation pursuant to the writ-petition judgment), the present contempt application is dismissed as infructuous.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

Any outstanding notice connected with the contempt application stands discharged.

¶13

Key takeaways

Liberty is expressly preserved: it remains open to the applicant to avail such remedy as may be permissible under law if he is still aggrieved.ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD (LUCKNOW BENCH), Court No. 8 — Hon'ble Manish Kumar, J. CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. 3020 of 2025 (Mahesh Kumar, Applicant v. Smt. Harshita Mathur, D.M./V.C., Raebareli Development Authority, Raebareli, Opposite Party). Decided November 11, 2025. Filed in respect of compliance with a judgement and order previously passed in a writ petition. Respondent no.1 filed a compliance affidavit (taken on record); respondent's counsel submitted that a decision dated 16.10.2025 had been taken on the applicant's representation in compliance with the writ-petition judgment, its copy being annexed at page 18 of the affidavit. The applicant's counsel conceded that for all practical purposes the contempt petition had become infructuous but sought liberty to file a fresh writ petition as the applicant's whole claim remained undecided. The Court dismissed the contempt application as infructuous, discharged notice, if any, and recorded that it is always open to the applicant to avail any remedy permissible under law if still aggrieved.

Mahesh Kumar v. Smt. Harshita Mathur, the D.M./the V.C. Raebareli Development Authority Raebareli

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahesh Kumar v. Smt. Harshita Mathur, the D.M./the V.C. Raebareli Development Authority Raebareli

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

Hari Govind Yadav Vs Smt. Kanchan Verma, Dir. Gen. of Edu./ State Project Dir. Samagra Shiksha Bhawan Lko. and Another

C/M Mannalal Indrani Kunwar Inter College Jaitpur Unnao Thru. Manager Dharam Vir Singh and Another Vs Shri Sunil Dutt Distt. Inspector of Schools Unnao

Smt. Krishna Kumari vs Shri Sanjay Mishra Executive Officer Nagar Palika Parishad Gonda

Lalta Prasad Yadav vs Sri Bholendra Pratap Singh, Distt. Basic Education Officer, Ambedkar Nagar and Another

Udai Pratap Singh vs Sri Indra Vikram Singh, Director Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad Kisan Mandi Bhawan Lko.

Ram Pal vs Pradeep Kumar Singh, Tehsildar Tehsil Swahawal Distt. Ayodhya