Vishal Tiwari vs Shri Umesh Chandra Yadav, Tehsildar Tehsil Kadipur Sultanpur — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Vishal Tiwari vs Shri Umesh Chandra Yadav, Tehsildar Tehsil Kadipur Sultanpur — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Contempt application dismissed as devoid of merits; notice, if any, stands discharged; learned counsel for the applicant is granted liberty to approach this Court at the appropriate stage.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent (opposite party, the Tehsildar) committed wilful and intentional non-compliance, i.e. wilful disobedience, of the writ Court's order dated 26.11.2024 passed in PIL No. 996 of 2025 directing that the proceedings under section 67 be concluded expeditiously.

Ratio / Principle

From perusal of the supplementary affidavit enclosing the orders passed in the proceedings under Section 67, it was found that 21 dates were fixed and that on 20 of those dates the lawyers were abstaining from judicial work.

Key takeaways

Because the respondent had fixed 21 dates between 20.01.2025 and 15.09.2025 and the lawyers were abstaining from judicial work on 20 of them, it could not be said that the respondent made wilful and intentional non compliance of the order passed by the writ Court; hence there was no wilful disobedience on the part of the respondent.ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt Application (Civil) No. 3028 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow (Manish Kumar, J.), decided October 8, 2025 — dismissed. Applicant Vishal Tiwari alleged non-compliance by opposite party Shri Umesh Chandra Yadav, Tehsildar Tehsil Kadipur Sultanpur, of the writ Court's order dated 26.11.2024 disposing of PIL No. 996 of 2025, which directed that the proceedings initiated under section 67 be concluded expeditiously in accordance with law. On a supplementary affidavit enclosing the orders passed in the proceedings under Section 67, the Court found that 21 dates were fixed between 20.01.2025 and 15.09.2025 and that on 20 dates the lawyers were abstaining from judicial work; accordingly it could not be said that the respondent made wilful and intentional non compliance of the writ Court's order, and no wilful disobedience was found. The contempt application was dismissed as devoid of merits, notice if any was discharged, and the applicant was granted liberty to approach the Court at an appropriate stage.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 3028 of 2025

Vishal Tiwari

Versus	.....Applicant(s)
Shri Umesh Chandra Yadav, Tehsildar Tehsil Kadipur Sultanpur	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Saubhagya Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s):	Mishra, Abhishek

Court No. - 8

HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J.

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

The present contempt application has been preferred for alleged non compliance non compliance of the judgment and order dated 26.11.2024 passed in Public Interest Litigation (PIL) No. 996 of 2025. The relevant extract of the order dated 26.11.2024 is quoted hereinbelow:-

"4. The Standing Counsel, based upon the instructions, states that the proceedings under section 67 have already been initiated and are pending.

5. In view of the said statement, no further directions are required to be passed from this court except to the effect that the proceedings initiated shall be concluded expeditiously in accordance with law.

6. The writ petition stands disposed off with the said observations. "

The copy of the judgment and order dated 26.11.2024 was served /filed on 30.11.2024.

From perusal of the supplementary affidavit, whereby the orders passed in the proceedings under Section 67 have been enclosed, it is found that total 21 dates were fixed and out of which on 20 dates, the lawyers were abstaining from judicial work.

Under these circumstances, it could not be said that the respondent has made wilful and intentional non compliance of the order passed by the writ Court. The respondent had fixed 21 dates in the matter since 20.01.2025 till 15.09.2025 and except one date, on 20 dates, the lawyers were abstaining from judicial work, hence it could not be said that there is any wilful disobedience on the part of the respondent.

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

CAPL No. 3028 of 2025

2

Notice if any, stands discharged.

At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant prays for and is granted liberty to approach this Court at the appropriate stage.

October 8, 2025

Nitesh

(Manish Kumar,J.)

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