Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Munni Devi vs Sri Yagendra Sahu Up Jiladhikari

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|28 July, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 4
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2691 of 2021 Applicant :- Munni Devi Opposite Party :- Sri Yagendra Sahu Up Jiladhikari Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kr Pandey
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant.
The applicant is before this Court for a direction to initiate contempt proceeding against the opposite parties for wilful disobedience of the order dated 19.02.2021 passed in Writ Petition No.26986 of 2020 (Munni Devi Vs. State of U.P. & others.). The aforesaid order is quoted as under:-
"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the contesting respondents.
By means of present writ petition, petitioner has sought following relief (s):
"(i) a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to initiate a proceeding for removal of obstacle/enchroachment made by respondent no. 5 to 10 over public pathway situated at plot no. 378 of concern village Mai Hardo Patti, Pargana & Tehsil - Bhadohi, District - Bhadohi, in view of the provisions given under the law.
(ii) a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents authorities i.e. respondent no.3 to decide the application dated 22.07.2014 and lastly moved on 23.09.2020 by petitioner before him within stipulated.
(iii) To issue any other/further writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.
(iv) To award the cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner."
Several contentions have been raised by learned counsel for the petitioner regarding blockage of passage in question and in that context a worthy representation has already been moved by the petitioner before respondent no.3, but the same has been kept pending and not disposed of as yet, which is causing great annoyance to the petitioner.
Learned Standing Counsel states that no useful purpose would be served by keeping this writ petition pending and same be disposed of by giving appropriate direction to the respondent concerned.
It is directed that the aforesaid representation shall be duly considered by respondent no. 3 as the case may be provided a copy of this order is produced before the aforesaid respondent within a period of three weeks from today and the same shall be disposed of by reasoned and speaking order within one month next after presentation of certified copy of this order.
With the aforesaid direction, the instant petition is disposed of "
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a copy of the aforesaid order was submitted for compliance before the opposite parties but the opposite parties have willfully not complied with the order and, thus, have 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 parties to comply with the aforesaid order of the Court within one month from the date of production of a copy of this order.
The applicant shall supply a duly stamped registered envelope addressed to the opposite parties and another self-addressed stamped envelope to the office within two weeks from today. The office shall send a copy of this order along with the self-addressed stamped envelope of the applicant with a copy of contempt application to the opposite parties within one week, thereafter and keep a record thereof. The opposite party shall comply with the directions of the writ Court and intimate the applicant 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 parties within the stipulated time as aforementioned.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 28.7.2021 saqlain
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Munni Devi vs Sri Yagendra Sahu Up Jiladhikari

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
28 July, 2021
Judges
  • Prakash Padia
Advocates
  • Vinod Kr Pandey