Mr. Dinesh Kumar Singh Vs Sanjay Prasad, Prin. Secy. Home Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Mr. Dinesh Kumar Singh Vs Sanjay Prasad, Prin. Secy. Home Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim order in continuing contempt proceeding: affidavit of compliance rejected; respondent no.4 to file fresh affidavit of compliance by next date of listing, failing which to appear for framing of charge; case listed on 26.5.2025.

Issue for consideration

Whether the affidavit of compliance filed by the respondent adequately evidences payment of the full salary due to the applicant for 8.5.2009 till 17.9.2010, given that detail of salary was not mentioned. +1 more

Court's answer

The affidavit of compliance sworn by Sri Amit Kumar II, Commandant, 45th Battalion, Pradeshik Armed Constabulary, Aligarh, U.P. is rejected as it is very sketchy, detail of salary not having been mentioned.

Ratio / Principle

Respondent no.4 is directed to file a fresh affidavit of compliance by the next date of listing (26.5.2025), failing which he shall appear before this Court for the purposes of framing of charge.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Rajeev Singh, J.), Order dated 29.4.2025 in CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. 4832 of 2024 (applicant: Dinesh Kumar Singh; opposite parties incl. Sanjay Prasad, Prin. Secy., Home, Govt. of U.P.). Background: Writ A No.1133 of 2012, disposed on 26.2.2024, had observed the applicant entitled to full salary for 8.5.2009 till 17.9.2010 (benefit of Regulation 441 having been granted, invalid pension thereafter) and directed payment within two months, leaving open a representation for assignment of General Duty work per the report of Shri Pramod Kumar, U.P. Sena Nayak. Counsel submitted only salary allowance was paid and neither full salary nor the representation had been attended to. The Court found the affidavit of compliance sworn by Sri Amit Kumar II, Commandant, 45th Battalion, Pradeshik Armed Constabulary, Aligarh, very sketchy as detail of salary was not mentioned, and rejected it; respondent no.4 was directed to file a fresh affidavit of compliance by 26.5.2025, failing which to appear for framing of charge; case listed for 26.5.2025.

Court No. - 17

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4832 of 2024

Applicant :- Mr. Dinesh Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- Sanjay Prasad, Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Of U.P. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anuradha Singh,Devanshi Srivastava

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that grievance of the applicant was not being considered then Writ A No.1133 of 2012 was filed, which was disposed of on 26.2.2024 with the observation that applicant is entitled for salary from the period 8.5.2009 till 17.9.2010, when the decision was taken by the authorities for granting benefit of Regulation 441 in favour of the applicant so this period from 8.5.2009 till 17.9.2010 would be entitled for payment of full salary, whereafter, he will continue to get invalid pension as ordered by the authorities, the respondents are directed to make full salary to the applicant for the period 8.5.2009 till 17.9.2010 within a period of two months from the date certified copy of this order is served. It was also open to the applicant to make a representation to the concerned authorities for being accommodated to assign any work of the post of General Duty as mentioned in the report submitted by Shri Pramod Kumar, U.P. Sena Nayak but till today neither the full salary has been paid nor the representation of the applicant has been decided.

Learned counsel for the applicant also submits that only salary allowance has been paid to the applicant.

As the affidavit of compliance filed by learned counsel for the respondent duly sworn by Sri Amit Kumar II, Commandant, 45th Battalion, Pradeshik Armed Constabulary, Aligarh, U.P. is very sketchy in manner as detail of salary has not been mentioned, therefore, the aforesaid affidavit is hereby, rejected.

List this case on 26.5.2025.

By the next date of listing, respondent no.4 is

directed to file fresh affidavit of compliance, failing which, he shall appear before this Court for the purposes of framing of charge.

Order Date :- 29.4.2025 GauraV/-

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