Dismissed¶¶14

Smt. Chandrakanti Devi v. Dr. Mahendra Dev. Dir. of Basic Edu. U.P. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC17 Feb 2026CAPL/1753/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench (Manish Kumar, J.; 17.02.2026), Contempt Application (Civil) No. 1753 of 2025, Chandrakanti Devi v. Dr. Mahendra Dev (Director of Basic Education, U.P.) & Anr. Dismissed as infructuous after respondent's compliance affidavit showed credit of family-pension arrears to the applicant. Arrears held payable w.e.f. 11.05.2016 (date of order withdrawing family pension per writ court's judgment), not 03.09.2007 as contended. Notice discharged; liberty reserved to pursue other legal remedies. No statute or precedent cited; no quantum stated.

What did the court decide?

Contempt application dismissed as infructuous; notice, if any, stands discharged; liberty to the applicant to avail any remedy permissible under the law if still aggrieved. ¶¶14

Smt. Chandrakanti Devi vs Dr. Mahendra Dev. Dir. of Basic Edu. U.P. Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1753 of 2025

¶3

Smt. Chandrakanti Devi

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

Dr. Mahendra Dev. Dir. Of Basic Edu. U.P. Lko. And Another

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶8

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Abhijeet Mishra, Sharad Pathak
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Shailendra Singh Rajawat

¶9

Court No. - 8

¶10

HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J.

¶11

Respondent has filed compliance affidavit (which is taken on record) enclosing therein the credit of the amount of arrears of family pension in the account of the applicant.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant is disputing the determination of the amount of arrears and has submitted that the applicant is entitled for payment of arrears w.e.f. 03.09.2007 but the said submission of learned counsel is found to be incorrect from the judgment and order passed in the writ petition itself wherein the family pension was withdrawn by passing an order dated 11.05.2016, as such the applicant is entitled for arrears w.e.f. 11.05.2016 and not from 03.09.2007.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the judgment and order passed by the writ Court has been complied with and for all practical purposes, the present contempt application has become infructuous and the same may be dismissed as infructuous, but there is some dispute for which liberty may be granted to the applicant to avail the remedy as may be permissible under the law.

¶14

In view of above, the present contempt application is dismissed as infructuous.

¶15

Notice, if any, stands discharged.

¶16

It is always open for the applicant to avail the remedy as may be permissible under the law, if he is still aggrieved.

¶17

February 17, 2026 Nitesh

¶18

(Manish Kumar,J.)

¶19

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

Smt. Chandrakanti Devi v. Dr. Mahendra Dev. Dir. of Basic Edu. U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Chandrakanti Devi v. Dr. Mahendra Dev. Dir. of Basic Edu. U.P. Lko. 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

Pramod Kumar Kashyap vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Anil Kumar Jaiswal vs Amit Kumar Ghosh Prin. Secy. Medical and Health Services Lko. and Another

Dev Prakash Shukla vs Shiv Sahay Awasthi I.A.S. Distt. Magistrate Pratapgadh and Another

Dhani Ram vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Kirti Sharma and Others vs L. Venketshwarlu, Prin. Secy. Harijan and Social Welfare Deptt., Lko. and 2 Others

Bhola Singh Chauhan @ Bhola Singh vs Shri Manish Kumar Chaudhari General Manager Producers Cooperative Milk U. Ltd. Prayagraj