Allahabad High Court
Reshami And 6 Others vs Pravar Sheel Varnwal, Chief Revenu ... on 20 February, 2020
Author: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 36 Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 975 of 2020 Applicant :- Reshami And 6 Others Opposite Party :- Pravar Sheel Varnwal, Chief Revenu Officer, Additional Collector / Additional District Magistrate Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilanand Mishra Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,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 17.11.2018 passed in Writ Petition No.37474 of 2018 (Reshami & Ors. v. Devi Muni & Ors.), which for ready reference is quoted as under:-
"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned Standing Counsel.
In view of the order proposed to be passed, notices need not go to private respondents.
The petitioners are before this Court for a direction to fifth respondent to decide Old Case No.124/1997 (New No.27/2004) (Dev Muni v. Reshami & Ors.) under Section 198 (4) UPZA & LR Act within stipulated period.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue and with the consent, the writ petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to the fifth respondent to consider and decide the aforesaid case in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order but certainly after giving opportunity to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties."
Learned counsel for the applicant has also placed reliance on the order dated 16.8.2002 passed in Writ Petition No.33928 of 2002 (Dev Muni v. Distt. Magistrate, Ballia & Ors.), which is quoted as under:-
"Heard Sri J.P.N. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the land in question will the final decision in Case 124/97 on the application under Section 198 (4) of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act.
With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of."
It is contended that on account of aforesaid order, delay tactics are being adopted by the other side and as such the writ Court order in question is not being complied with.
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 dated 17.11.2018 and finalise the proceeding in question by all means within three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, without according even a single adjournment to either of the parties and if necessary day to day hearing may be ensured in the matter.
The applicant shall supply a duly stamped registered envelope addressed to the opposite parties and another self-addressed stamped envelope to the office within three 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.
Order Date :- 20.2.2020 SP/