Allahabad High Court
Rishabh Kumar Mishra vs Ruby Singh, Secretary, Basic Shiksha ... on 19 October, 2019
Author: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 10 Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 6875 of 2019 Applicant :- Rishabh Kumar Mishra Opposite Party :- Ruby Singh, Secretary, Basic Shiksha Parishad And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shivendu Ojha,Shatrughan Sonwal,Sri Radha Kant Ojha, Sr. Advocate 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 13.5.2019 passed in Writ A No. 6288 of 2019 (Rishabh Kumar Mishra v. State of U.P. & Ors.), which for ready reference is quoted as under:-
"Written instructions along with expert report provided by the learned Standing counsel is taken on record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has demonstrated from the Question Booklet Series-'D', key answers, and answer scripts of the petitioner that answers to question nos.9, 35, 48, 64 and 133 are correct. It appears that the marks have not been provided to the petitioner by the examiners for the reason that there was some cutting in the column of answers to the said questions.
In view of the judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No.18235 of 2018 in Annirudh Narain Shukla vs. State of U.P. such cutting and overwriting is liable to be ignored. Further stand of the respondent that the petitioner did not apply for the online revaluation cannot be accepted for the reason that petitioner had applied for scanned copy of the answer script by moving an application dated 13.9.2018 but the same was received by him on 7.5.2019 as the petitioner could not go through the scanned copy and was not sure about the mistake therein, it was not possible for him to apply for revaluation.
The respondent no.4, Secretary Examination Regulatory Authority, U.P., Allahabad, is, therefore, directed to provide five marks to the petitioner for the aforesaid answers and declare corrected result at the website within a fortnight from today.
The writ petition is allowed."
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a certified copy of the aforesaid order was submitted for compliance before the opposite parties but the opposite parties have wilfully 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 two 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 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 :- 19.10.2019 Jaswant