Dismissed¶13

Nirmala Kumari v. Sri Sanjay Singh Managing Direct. U.P. Krishi Anusandhan Parishad and Another

Allahabad HC8 Jan 2026CAPL/4080/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Nirmala Kumari v. Sanjay Singh (Managing Director, U.P. Krishi Anusandhan Parishad) and another — Contempt Application (Civil) No. 4080 of 2024, Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench, Manish Kumar J., decided 08.01.2026 — contempt petition dismissed as infructuous on counsel's concession that the Writ Court's judgment and order stood complied with; compliance affidavits enclosed letter dated 12.11.2024 deciding/rejecting the applicant's representation; liberty granted to file a writ petition against the order dated 12.11.2024; earlier notice, if any, discharged.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the applicant to challenge the order dated 12.11.2024 rejecting her representation by filing a writ petition; notice issued earlier, if any, stands discharged ¶13

Nirmala Kumari vs Sri Sanjay Singh Managing Direct. U.P. Krishi Anusandhan Parishad and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4080 of 2024

Nirmala Kumari

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

Sri Sanjay Singh Managing Direct. U.P. Krishi Anusandhan Parishad And Another

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶8

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Ganga Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Anshuman Singh, Dr. Pooja Singh

¶9

Court No. - 8

¶10

HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J.

¶11

Compliance affidavits have been filed by respondent nos. 1 and 2, which are taken on record. In the said compliance affidavits, the letter dated 12.11.2024 has been enclosed whereby the representation of the applicant has been decided.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant, after arguing at some length, has very fairly submitted that the judgment and order of 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 with liberty to the applicant to challenge the order dated 12.11.2024 whereby representation of the applicant has been rejected by filing writ petition.

¶13

As prayed, the present contempt petition is dismissed as infructuous.

¶14

Notice issued earlier, if any, stands discharged.

¶15

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

¶16

January 8, 2026 Ashish

¶17

(Manish Kumar,J.)

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Nirmala Kumari v. Sri Sanjay Singh Managing Direct. U.P. Krishi Anusandhan Parishad and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nirmala Kumari v. Sri Sanjay Singh Managing Direct. U.P. Krishi Anusandhan Parishad 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

Mahesh Prasad Tripathi vs Shri Ramesh Babu Gupta Managing Director U.P. State Ware Housing Corporation Lko.

Jeet Bahadur vs Mrs. Veena Kumari Meena Prin. Secy. Ayush ANUBHAG-1, Lko. and Another

Dhiru Awasthi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

M/S Mankameshwar Developers Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Director Mr. Alok Gupta vs Sushri Seema Singh II Addl. Civil Judge Senior Division Lko.

Smt. Nirmala Mishra and Another vs Ashish Kumar Singh, S.D.M., Tehsil Amethi, Distt. Amethi

Anoop Kumar and 2 Others vs Shri P. Guruprasad Prin. Secy. Housing and Development U.P. Lko.