Disposed¶18

Prashant Kumar Pathak v. Sri P.N. Singh, District Inspector of Schools, Distt. Allahabad and Another

Allahabad HC30 Apr 2025CAPL/4603/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt application (civil); non-compliance with assurance in order dated 11.03.2025; District Inspector of Schools Allahabad; compliance affidavit; stay vacation application pending before writ Court; deliberate delay; misleading assurance; ex-facie contempt; framing of charges; personal appearance; listed 28.04.2025; Jaspreet Singh, J.; Lucknow Bench.

What did the court decide?

No final disposal; on the officer's request, further time was allowed and the contempt application listed for 28.04.2025, with a direction that if compliance with the order dated 11.03.2025 is not made, the officer shall again appear in person. ¶18

Prashant Kumar Pathak Vs Sri P.N. Singh, District Inspector of Schools, Distt. Allahabad and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent no. 1 (Shri P.N. Singh, District Inspector of Schools, Allahabad) is responsible for contempt of the order dated 11.03.2025 for not complying with the assurance recorded therein, irrespective of whether the writ court order has been complied with.

¶17

Court's answer

Non-compliance with the order of, and the assurance given to, the Court on 11.03.2025 is a deliberate attempt to delay the proceedings, and the assurance given prima facie appears misleading, aimed at obtaining adjournment rather than serious compliance with the Court's order.

¶16

Ratio / Principle

Respondent no. 1 appears ex-facie responsible for committing contempt of the order dated 11.03.2025 by not complying with the assurance recorded therein, irrespective of whether the writ court order has been complied with.

¶17

Key takeaways

Considering the officer's request for time, the matter is listed for 28.04.2025; if compliance in terms of the earlier order dated 11.03.2025 is not made, the officer concerned shall again appear in person.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 8 (Jaspreet Singh, J.), Contempt Application (Civil) No. 4603 of 2024, order dated 21.04.2025 — Shri P.N. Singh, District Inspector of Schools, Allahabad (respondent no. 1), appeared in person and sought further time by affidavit. The Court found that the assurance recorded in the order dated 11.03.2025 — to file a compliance affidavit if no favourable order was passed on the stay vacation application pending before the writ Court, failing which to appear for framing of charges — remained unimplemented, and observed prima facie that this was a deliberate attempt to delay proceedings and that the assurance appeared misleading. The officer was put on notice that he appears ex-facie responsible for contempt of the order dated 11.03.2025 irrespective of compliance with the writ court order. On his request, the matter was listed for 28.04.2025 with a direction that failing compliance he shall again appear in person.

¶1

Court No. - 8

¶2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4603 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Prashant Kumar Pathak Opposite Party :- Sri P.N. Singh, District Inspector Of Schools, Distt. Allahabad And Another Counsel for Applicant :- M.K. Singh Bhardwaj Counsel for Opposite Party :- Vikas Chaturvedi,Vinai Kumar Bhatt

¶4

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶5

Shri Pratap Narain Singh who is District Inspector of School, Allahabad is present in Court. An Affidavit has been filed by him seeking grant of time to pursue legal remedy.

¶6

What appears is the fact that on 11.03.2025, the said officer had appeared before the Court and had made a submission which was recorded in the order itself and for ready reference the same is being reproduced hereinafter:-

¶7

"Rejoinder affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶8

Sri P.N.Singh, District Inspector of Schools, District Allahabad i.e. respondent no. 1 is present.

¶9

Learned Standing counsel has submitted that on the last occasion, the case was listed on 30.01.2025 and the Court had granted two weeks' time, as prayed, for filing compliance affidavit in case no order is passed on the stay vacation application which is pending before the writ Court.

¶10

The writ petition was listed yesterday i.e. 10.03.2025 and a mention was made for taking up the case. The case was taken up and learned counsel for the petitioner/applicant in the present case was granted a week's time for filing rejoinder affidavit and further directed for listing of this case in the week commencing 07.04.2025.

¶11

It is further submitted that the stay vacation application was not heard because of the time taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner/applicant in the present case so, the present contempt application may be deferred and be listed after week commencing 07.04.2025.

¶12

Sri P.N. Singh, District Inspector of Schools (respondent no. 1) has submitted that one more opportunity may be given for filing compliance affidavit in case, no favourable order is passed on the stay vacation application.

¶13

In view of facts discussed hereinabove, the prayer made by respondent no. 1 is hereby accepted.

¶14

List this case in the week commencing 21.04.2025.

¶15

In case, no favourable order is passed on the stay vacation application, the respondent shall file compliance affidavit as per his submission made hereinabove, failing which he shall appear before this Court for the purposes of framing of charges."

¶16

Apparently, in the affidavit filed today, it has been stated that still time is required but the fact remains that the order passed and the assurance given to the Court on 11.03.2025 has not been complied with. It is clearly indicated that this is a deliberate attempt of delaying the proceedings and not only the order of the writ court has not been complied with but even the assurance prima facie given to the Court and recorded in the order dated 11.03.2025 appears to be misleading with an attempt to get the proceedings adjourned rather than to make efforts to seriously comply with the order passed by the Court.

¶17

It was put to the Officer Shri P. N. Singh that in the aforesaid backdrop, he appears to be ex-facie responsible for committing contempt of the order dated 11.03.2025 not complying with the assurance irrespective of the fact whether the order of the writ Court has not been complied with. However, he submits that in deference to the assurance given to this Court he may be granted three days time to ensure the compliance of his assurance as indicated in the order dated 11.03.2025.

¶18

Considering this, list this matter on 28th of April, 2025 and in case if the compliance in terms of the earlier order dated 11.03.2025 is not made, the Officer concerned shall again appear in person.

¶19

Order Date :- 21.4.2025 ank

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ALI NEWAZ KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Prashant Kumar Pathak v. Sri P.N. Singh, District Inspector of Schools, Distt. Allahabad and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prashant Kumar Pathak v. Sri P.N. Singh, District Inspector of Schools, Distt. Allahabad and Another

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

Naresh Vs Rekha S. Chauhan, Registrar, Gandhi Memorial and Associated Hospitals Kgmu Lko.

Shivmilan @ Shivmilan Mishra Vs the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.) Court NO.24, Barabanki

Kamlesh Vs Sri Ashutosh Jaiswal, Divisional Forest Officer, Van Evam Jal Vayu Parivartan Prabhag, Raebareli

Viroma Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Thru Authorised Signatory Mr. Amit Vs Sri Alok Kumar Addl. Cheif Secy./Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Infrastructure and Industrial Development Lko

Smt. Amina Vs Sri. Chandra Prakash Gautam, Sub Divisional Magistrate Raebareli and 2 Others

Jagat Pal and 3 Others Vs P. Guru. Prasad, Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Housing and Urban Planning, Lko.and 3 Others