Allahabad High Court
Mohammad Yunnush vs Rakesh ... on 1 July, 2021
Author: Manish Mathur
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 20 Case :- CONTEMPT No. - 573 of 2021 Applicant :- Mohammad Yunnush Opposite Party :- Rakesh Singh,Tehsildar(Judicial)Gonda & Anr. Counsel for Applicant :- Kaushal Mani Tripathi,Pramod Kumar Misra,Vayu Nandan Mishra Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
Heard learned counsel for petitioner.
Notices issued to opposite party, if any stand dispensed with.
Disobedience has been alleged of the order dated 24.09.2020 passed in Writ Petition No.15491 (MS) of 2020 (Mohd. Ishak vs. State of U.P. & Ors) in which the following order was passed:
"6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without entering into the merits, respondent no.2 - Tehsildar (Judicial), Tehsil and District Gonda, is directed to decide Case No.783, under Section 67 (1) of U.P. Revenue Code- Gaon Sabha Vs. Masihuzzama), expeditiously, say within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order, in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment and communicate the same to the petitioner as well."
Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that in pursuance to the said direction, the concerned authority has passed order dated 04.11.2020 finding encroachment upon Gaon Sabha Land with direction for immediate dispossession of the encroacher along with imposition of fine and issuance of recovery certificate. It is however submitted that despite the orders having been passed in terms of Section 67 of Revenue Code 2006, the said encroachers are still in possession over the property in question and therefore the order dated 04.11.2020 is existing only on paper and has not been implemented due to which the opposite parties are under a continuing contempt since the directions of this Court were required to be complied with in letter and spirit.
Upon consideration of material available on record and submissions of learned counsel for petitioner, it is apparent from the order passed by this Court dated 24.09.2020 that the Tehsildar was required to decide the Case No.783, under Section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code expeditiously within a certain time frame. It is admitted by the petitioner that the aforesaid case has been decided in terms of directions of this Court but is alleging contempt only on the ground that the order dated 04.11.2020 passed by Tehsildar under Section 67 of the Revenue Code has not yet been implemented.
It is quite apparent that only the direction issued by this Court was for deciding the case within a certain time frame. That having been done, there is no occasion for the contempt to continue against the concerned authority. It is apparent from the order dated 04.11.2020 passed by Tehsildar that the case has been decided in terms of Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code 2006. As such, opposite parties having purged themselves of the contempt, the present petition is dismissed.
Notices issued earlier stand discharged.
Order Date :- 1.7.2021 Subodh/-