Nathulal N. Pathak Vs Ghasi Ram, Tehsildar Kishni, District-Mainpuri, Uttar Pradesh.

Court No. - 2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 650 of 2025

Applicant :- Nathulal N. Pathak Opposite Party :- Ghasi Ram, Tehsildar Kishni, District-Mainpuri, Uttar Pradesh.

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Amitabh Agarwal

¶5

Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

¶7

The instant contempt application has been filed for wilful disobedience of the order dated 18.12.2023 passed in Review Application No. 554/2023 as well as the order dated 03.10.2023 passed in PIL No. 2002 of 2023 filed by the applicant.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that vide order dated 03.10.2023, the writ Court has disposed of the PIL on the instruction of the learned Standing Counsel that the illegal encroachment has been removed from the land in question and the proceedings under the U.P. Revenue Code have been initiated against the encroachers. He further submits that on finding the averments made in the instruction to be incorrect, the applicant preferred review application, in which vide order dated 18.12.2023, the Court has passed the following order:-

¶9

"Copy of the instructions which disclosed that the proceedings under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 have already been initiated against the encroachers, is served upon learned counsel for applicant, however, he submitted that although case numbers have been mentioned in the instructions but perhaps no proceedings have been initiated against the persons who are still in possession over the property in dispute which pertains to Gram Sabha, if that be so, respondent no.4 is hereby directed to seek report with regard to statement made by learned counsel for applicant, if the illegal possession remains the the same, appropriate action be taken for removal of the alleged encroachment carried over pond and chakmarg and shall also initiate proceedings under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 against the encroachers."

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in spite of service of the aforesaid orders for compliance before the opposite party, the opposite party has wilfully not complied with the orders and, thus, has committed civil contempt liable for punishment under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

¶11

The record shows that after the order passed in the review application, a case has been rejected as evidenced from Annexure

¶12

No. 10 at page 74, but the case has not come to the logical end.

¶13

From a perusal of the records of the case, a prima facie case for contempt is made out against the opposite party.

¶14

Issue notice to the opposite party returnable within period of one month.

¶15

Steps be taken within a week.

¶16

However, in the interest of justice, one more opportunity is granted to the opposite party to comply with the writ Court's order within a period of one month and file an affidavit to the same effect.

¶17

In case by the next date fixed, the directions of the writ Court are not complied with and an affidavit to that effect is not filed, the opposite party shall remain present before this Court on the date fixed to show cause as to why proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act may not be initiated against him.

¶18

The Office may send a copy of this order along with the notice.

¶19

List on the date fixed in the notice as fresh.

¶20

Order Date :- 14.2.2025 Amit Mishra

¶21

Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nathulal N. Pathak v. Ghasi Ram, Tehsildar Kishni, District-Mainpuri, Uttar Pradesh.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nathulal N. Pathak v. Ghasi Ram, Tehsildar Kishni, District-Mainpuri, Uttar Pradesh.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases