Dismissed¶¶15

Rajeev Yadav v. Sri Shiv Sahay Awasthi, Distt. Magistrate Pratapgarh U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC19 Jan 2026CAPL/144/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 8 — Contempt Application (CIVIL) No. 144 of 2026, Rajeev Yadav v. Sri Shiv Sahay Awasthi, Distt. Magistrate Pratapgarh U.P. and 4 Others, decided January 19, 2026 by Hon'ble Manish Kumar, J. Civil contempt — alleged incomplete construction of chak marg despite direction dated 24.03.2025 in Writ C No. 4914 of 2023 (identification and construction to be completed preferably within six months) — applicant produced no measurements or photographs of the alleged half-completed road — held: no case of contempt made out; contempt application dismissed.

What did the court decide?

No case of contempt is made out on the alleged incomplete construction of the chak marg; the contempt application is dismissed. ¶¶15

Rajeev Yadav vs Sri Shiv Sahay Awasthi, Distt. Magistrate Pratapgarh U.P. and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 144 of 2026

Rajeev Yadav

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

Sri Shiv Sahay Awasthi, Distt. Magistrate Pratapgarh U.P. And 4 Others

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶8

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: In Person
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:

¶9

Court No. - 8

¶10

HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J.

¶11

The present contempt application has been preferred against the alleged non compliance of the judgment and order dated 24.03.2025 passed in Writ C No. 4914 of 2023. The relevant paragraph of the same is quoted hereinbelow:-

¶12

"4. In view of the abovesaid statement, it is directed that the work of identification and thereafter construction shall be concluded in accordance with law with all expedition preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. "

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that though the work of identification has been done but the road has not been constructed completely. Only about half of the chak marg has been constructed.

¶14

On being asked from the learned counsel for the applicant as to what is the length of the chak marg and is there any photograph enclosed by the applicant that only about half of the construction has been done, he has replied that the applicant has neither given the details of the length/measurement of the chak marg nor enclosed any photograph of the same. The direction of the Court also only provides for completion of chak marg preferably within a period of six months.

¶15

In view of above, no case of contempt is made out. The present contempt application is accordingly dismissed.

¶16

January 19, 2026

¶17

Nitesh

¶18

(Manish Kumar,J.)

¶19

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

Rajeev Yadav v. Sri Shiv Sahay Awasthi, Distt. Magistrate Pratapgarh U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajeev Yadav v. Sri Shiv Sahay Awasthi, Distt. Magistrate Pratapgarh U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs. Pratima Yadav vs Surya Pal Gangwar, District Magistrate Lko.

Chandra Prakash Pandey vs Mr. B.L. Meena (Babu Lal Meena ), Commissioner / Registrar, Cooperative, U.P., Lko. and Another

Smt. Mamta Tiwari vs Shri Anshuman Singh, Chief Medical Officer, Amethi

Akhilesh Kumar Gupta vs Himanshu Tandan Cluster Head / Divisional Head, Hdfc Bank

Sumit Sinha @ Sumit Ranjan @ Lala vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 3 Others

Radha @ Kamla vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another