Court No. - 28
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4189 of 2018 Applicant :- Sarla Singh And Another Opposite Party :- Dinesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Jaiswal,Siddarth Jaiswal
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
It is alleged that the order dated 10.1.2018 passed by this court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.1050 of 2018 (Aayendra Pal Singh & another Vs. State of U.P. & others) is being violated by respondent no.1. The order is being extracted hereunder:-
"The writ petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent no.2 / Sub-Divisional Officer, Tehsil Dataganj, District Budaun to execute the order dated 30.6.2017 in Suit No. T-201712712032214 under Section 116 of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, as expeditiously as possible, keeping in view the observations of this Court made in Writ-C No. 6635 of 2012 (Chandra Bali Vs. Addl. Commissioner and others) decided on 7.2.2012, without granting any frivolous adjournments. Adjournment, if any, shall be for strong and compelling reasons, else would attract an exemplary cost of not less than Rs.250/- payable to the other side"
The writ petition was disposed of on the first day without noticing opposite parties. A perusal of the order-sheet discloses that no unnecessary adjournment was granted. The order-sheet also discloses that on many occasions the lawyers including the counsel for the applicants abstained from the work. The lawyers including counsel for the applicants were abstaining from work on 18.5.2018, 24.5.2018, 28.5.2018 and 15.6.2018. The applicants are being represented through their counsel. They cannot disown the absence of their counsel by stating that the counsel had abstained from work but not the applicants. If the counsel for the applicants are abstaining from work, the applicant cannot prosecute the contempt application against the Officers.
The order-sheet attests to the fact that the procedure established by law is being adhered to by the adjudicating authority. The order passed by this court on 10.1.2018 does not contemplate that the adjudicating authority should rush through the proceedings without regard to provisions of law. The proceeding before the authority below is quasi judicial nature. The procedure prescribed by law has to be strictly adhered to. The order dated 20.6.2018 shows that the applicants had filed an application on 1.5.2018. The opposite parties naturally have to be given time to submit their objections/reply to the same. The order sheet reveals that no frivolous adjournment was granted.
The court below has proceeded in accordance with law.
The contempt application is dismissed. It is open to the applicants to avail appropriate remedy in law.
Order Date :- 23.8.2018 Pramod