Court No. - 10
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 6352 of 2019 Applicant :- Ainuddin Khan Opposite Party :- Sri Pankaj Mishra, Chief Conservator Of Forest Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Narayan Tripathi
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant.
By order dated 7.1.2019 passed in Writ C No. 162 of 2018 filed by the applicant, the Court directed as under:
"This petition for writ is before us to have an appropriate writ, order or direction for respondent - Chief Conservator of Forest, Lucknow to decide the issue regarding renewal of saw mill licence in favour of respondent no. 5, who happens to be nephew of petitioner.
It is stated that, as a matter of fact, the licence from inception was in favour of the petitioner to run the saw mill and his nephew, namely, Ishar Ahmed was looking after day to day affair of the saw mill. Ishar Ahmed from the year 1996-97 started to mention his name in different communications relating to the saw mill and ultimately in the year 2009 got the licence of saw mill in his favour.
The grievance of the petitioner is that the change of the licence by way of renewal has been made by fraud and that requires to be considered and to be restored in his name.
Before approaching this Court, the petitioner submitted a representation to the Principal Conservator of Forest on 06.12.2018, copy whereof is available on record as Annexure No. 6 to the writ petition.
We are of considered opinion that the issue sought to be agitated in this petition for writ involves disputed questions of facts and further a dispute between the private parties, therefore, it would not be appropriate to invoke writ jurisdiction to examine merit of the case, however, Principal Conservator of Forest to whom the representation is said to be given on 06.12.2018 may very well look into the entire matter and take appropriate decision.
In view of it, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter but the Principal Conservator of Forest must examine the grievance of the petitioner as agitated by him in the representation given and also before us in this petition for writ.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by keeping the petitioner at liberty to submit a fresh representation to the Chief Conservator of Forest, Lucknow alongwith memo of this petition for writ to get his grievance redressed expeditiously."
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a certified copy of the aforesaid order was submitted for compliance before the opposite party but the opposite party has wilfully not complied with the order and, thus, has committed civil contempt liable for punishment under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Prima facie a case of contempt has been made out. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, one more opportunity is afforded to the opposite party to comply with the aforesaid order of the Court within three weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
The applicant shall supply a duly stamped registered envelope addressed to the opposite party and another self-addressed stamped envelope to the office within one week from today. The office shall send a copy of this order along with the self- addressed envelope of the applicant with a copy of contempt application to the opposite party within one week thereafter and keep a recorded thereof.
The opposite party shall comply with the directions of the writ court and intimate him of the order through the self-addressed envelop within a week thereafter.
With the aforesaid observations, this application is disposed of at this stage with liberty to the applicant to move a fresh application, if the order is not complied with by the opposite party within the stipulated time as aforementioned.
Order Date :- 27.9.2019 Jaswant