Dismissed¶18

Daya Pratap Pal v. Sri Gyanendra Pratap Director General of Police C.R.P.F. New Delhi and Another

Allahabad HC11 Feb 2026CAPL/2568/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CAPL(C) 2568 of 2025; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Court No. 8; Manish Kumar J.; decided 11.02.2026. Contempt alleging non-compliance of judgment/order dated 12.08.2024 in Special Appeal (Defective) No. 254 of 2024 re compassionate appointment per Rules/Policy and Department of Personnel and Training circular dated 05.09.2016. Found complied with: Ground Duty Clerk candidature duly considered, applicant unfit in physical test; rejection order dated 25.09.2025; fresh application dated 26.09.2025 for Civilian Cook post outside the Court's direction. Contempt application dismissed as infructuous; notice, if any, discharged.

What did the court decide?

The judgment and order dated 12.08.2024 passed by this Court has been duly complied with. ¶15

Daya Pratap Pal vs Sri Gyanendra Pratap Director General of Police C.R.P.F. New Delhi and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether the judgment and order dated 12.08.2024, passed in Special Appeal (Defective) No. 254 of 2024, has been duly complied with by the opposite parties. +1 more

¶8

Court's answer

The judgment and order dated 12.08.2024 passed by this Court has been duly complied with.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

Pursuant to that judgment's direction, the applicant's candidature for the post of Ground Duty Clerk was duly considered and he was found unfit in the physical test.

¶15

Key takeaways

No direction was issued by this Court to consider the applicant's subsequent application dated 26.09.2025 seeking compassionate appointment on the post of Civilian Cook.ratio¶16
Non-consideration of that subsequent application cannot be termed as non-compliance of the judgment and order dated 12.08.2024.ratio¶16
The present contempt application has become infructuous, as the judgment and order passed by this Court has already been complied with.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt Application (CIVIL) No. 2568 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 8, Manish Kumar, J., decided February 11, 2026. Applicant sought action for alleged non-compliance of the judgment/order dated 12.08.2024 in Special Appeal (Defective) No. 254 of 2024, which had allowed the writ petition directing consideration of his claim for compassionate appointment in accordance with Rules/Policy, keeping in mind the circular of the Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India dated 05.09.2016, re-consideration within six weeks and communication of the resulting order immediately thereafter. Held: compliance was complete — the candidature for Ground Duty Clerk was duly considered and the applicant was found unfit in the physical test (rejection order dated 25.09.2025, enclosed in compliance affidavit filed 29/30.10.2025); the fresh application dated 26.09.2025 for the post of Civilian Cook was covered by no direction of this Court, so its non-consideration is not non-compliance. Contempt application dismissed as infructuous; notice, if any, discharged.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2568 of 2025

¶3

Daya Pratap Pal

¶4

.....Applicant(s) Versus

¶5

Sri Gyanendra Pratap Director General Of Police C.R.P.F. New Delhi And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Raj Kumar Singh

¶6

Court No. - 8

¶7

HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J.

¶8

The present contempt application has been preferred alleging noncompliance of the judgment and order dated 12.08.2024, passed in Special Appeal (Defective) No. 254 of 2024. The relevant portion of the said judgment is quoted hereinbelow:-

¶9

" 6. The writ petition is allowed with a direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the appellant/petitioner for compassionate appointment in accordance with Rules/ Policy keeping in mind the Circular of Department of Personal and Training, Government of India dated 05.09.2016. This re-consideration shall be done within a period of six weeks and appropriate order shall be passed accordingly which shall be communicated or the appellant/petitioner immediately thereafter. "

¶10

Learned counsel for the opposite party submits that a compliance affidavit has already been filed on 29/30.10.2025, enclosing therewith a copy of the order dated 25.09.2025, whereby the candidature of the applicant has been rejected. It is further submitted that till date no objection has been filed by the applicant against the said compliance affidavit.

¶11

On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicant submits that after rejection of the applicant's claim for compassionate appointment on the post of Ground Duty Clerk vide order dated 25.09.2025, the applicant moved another application on 26.09.2025 for consideration of his candidature for compassionate appointment on the post of Civilian Cook, on which no decision has been taken till date. Hence, it is contended that the judgment and order passed by the writ court has not been complied with.

¶12

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record of the case, it is found that the judgment and order passed by this Court has

¶13

CAPL No. 2568 of 2025

¶14

¶15

been duly complied with. The applicant had applied for compassionate appointment on the post of Ground Duty Clerk, and this Court had directed consideration of his candidature keeping in mind the circular of Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India dated 05.09.2016. In pursuance thereof, the candidature of the applicant was duly considered, and he was found unfit in the physical test.

¶16

It is an admitted case of the applicant that instead of challenging the rejection order, he moved another application on the very same date, i.e., 26.09.2025, seeking compassionate appointment on the post of Civilian Cook, after the rejection order dated 25.09.2025. There was no direction issued by this Court to consider any such subsequent application. Therefore, nonconsideration of the said application cannot be termed as non-compliance of the judgment and order dated 12.08.2024.

¶17

In view of the facts, circumstances, and discussion made hereinabove, the present contempt application has become infructuous, as the judgment and order passed by this Court has already been complied with.

¶18

Accordingly, the present contempt application is dismissed as infructuous.

¶19

Notice, if any, stands discharged.

¶20

February 11, 2026 DiVYa

¶21

(Manish Kumar,J.)

¶22

Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Daya Pratap Pal v. Sri Gyanendra Pratap Director General of Police C.R.P.F. New Delhi and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Daya Pratap Pal v. Sri Gyanendra Pratap Director General of Police C.R.P.F. New Delhi and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pramendra Sharma vs Shri Vipul Shiv Sagar Distt. Basic Edu. Officer Distt. Jhansi and 2 Others

Ramakant Pandey vs Sri Ram Prasad Tiwari Deputy Collector Sdm Ayodhya and Another

Smt. Vandana and Another vs Smt. Riya Kejariwal Managing Director Madhayanchal Vidut Nigam Ltd. Lko.

Ankita Nigam vs Dr. Surya Kant, Deptt., of Respiratory Medicine, Kgmu, Lko.

Lakhan Singh vs Mr. Manish Chauhan Prin. Secy. General Administration Govt. Sectt. Lko.

Ankita vs Shri Hub Lal, Nayab Tehsildar, Tehsil Alapur Circle Jahangeerganj Dist. Ambedkar Nagar