Disposed¶11

Vindha Deen Mishra v. Mr. Shiv Sahay Awasthi, Distt. Magistrate Pratapgarh

Allahabad HC27 Apr 2026CAPL/1203/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: contempt petition consigned to record; substantial compliance as the only test in contempt jurisdiction; merits of compliance report not examined; remedy lies elsewhere; no investigation on merits in contempt; District Magistrate, Pratapgarh; report dated 18.04.2026; communication dated 14.01.2026 of District Panchayati Raj Officer, Pratapgarh; underlying order dated 06.06.2025 in Writ-C No. 5387 of 2025; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Court No. 32; Vikas Budhwar, J.; decided April 27, 2026.

What did the court decide?

No coercive contempt action; the petition is consigned to record and the applicant is left free to take appropriate legal steps permissible under law. ¶11

Vindha Deen Mishra vs Mr. Shiv Sahay Awasthi, Distt. Magistrate Pratapgarh — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No coercive contempt action; the petition is consigned to record and the applicant is left free to take appropriate legal steps permissible under law.

¶11

Issue for consideration

Whether there has been substantial compliance of the order dated 06.06.2025 passed in Writ-C No. 5387 of 2025, the only question to be seen in contempt jurisdiction.

¶10

Ratio / Principle

In contempt jurisdiction the Court is not required to go into the merits of the compliance report; what is to be seen is only whether there has been substantial compliance.

¶10

Key takeaways

Though learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner submits that the report dated 18.04.2026 is sketchy and draws no conclusion, the Court will not delve into that issue; the remedy lies elsewhere, particularly since investigation on merits is not warranted in contempt jurisdiction.ratio¶10
The contempt petition is consigned to record, leaving it open to the applicant to take appropriate legal steps permissible under law.ratio¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 32 - Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar, J. Contempt Application (Civil) No. 1203 of 2026, Vindha Deen Mishra v. Shiv Sahay Awasthi, District Magistrate, Pratapgarh; decided April 27, 2026. The petition alleged non-compliance of the order dated 06.06.2025 passed in Writ-C No. 5387 of 2025. The compliance affidavit of the District Magistrate was taken on record, along with an affidavit of compliance bringing on record a report dated 18.04.2026 on the inquiry conducted and a communication dated 14.01.2026 of the District Panchayati Raj Officer, Pratapgarh addressed to the petitioner. Held: under contempt jurisdiction the Court is not required to go into the merits of the compliance report; the only question is whether there has been substantial compliance. Counsel's submission that the report dated 18.04.2026 was sketchy and drew no conclusion was not gone into - the remedy lies elsewhere, investigation on merits not being warranted in contempt jurisdiction. The contempt petition was consigned to record, leaving it open to the applicant to take appropriate legal steps permissible under law.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1203 of 2026

¶3

Vindha Deen Mishra

¶4

Versus	.....Applicant(s)
Mr. Shiv Sahay Awasthi, Distt. Magistrate Pratapgarh	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :	Gauri Shankar Maurya

¶5

Court No. - 32

¶6

HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J.

¶7

Compliance affidavit filed by District Magistrate, Pratapgarh is taken on record.

¶8

This contempt petition has been preferred alleging non compliance of the order dated 06.06.2025 passed in Writ-C No. 5387 of 2025.

¶9

An affidavit of compliance has been filed bringing on record a report dated 18.04.2026 with respect to the inquiry so conducted and a communication dated 14.01.2026 of the District Panchayati Raj Officer, Pratapgarh addressed to the petitioner.

¶10

In the opinion of the Court under contempt jurisdiction, this Court is not required to go into the merits of the report as what is to be seen is whether there has been substantial compliance or not. Though the learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner submits that the report dated 18.04.2026 is sketchy and no conclusion has been drawn but this Court is not required to delve into the said issue as the remedy lies elsewhere particularly when in contempt jurisdiction investigation on merits is not warranted.

¶11

Accordingly, the contempt petition is consigned to record leaving it open for the applicant to take appropriate legal steps which are permissible under law.

¶12

April 27, 2026 Rajesh

¶13

(Vikas Budhwar,J.)

¶14

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

Vindha Deen Mishra v. Mr. Shiv Sahay Awasthi, Distt. Magistrate Pratapgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vindha Deen Mishra v. Mr. Shiv Sahay Awasthi, Distt. Magistrate Pratapgarh

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

Ram Kewal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Sugar Industries Lko. and 3 Others

Madhur Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Rural Development U.P. Lko. and 5 Others

Ashish Kumar vs Sunil Chaudhary Chief Conservator of Forest Deptt U.P. Lko. and Another

Jai Bind Singh vs Srimati Mona Singh Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate (Third) Unnao

Shree Narayan Pandey vs Shri Dinesh Kumar Tehsildar Tehsildar Tehsil Bikapur Distt. Ayodhya

Pawan Kumar Rai vs Shri Nikhil Tikaram Funde, D.M., Ayodhya and Another