Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 114445 (ALL)

JHOTHU AND 2 OTHERS v. DR. M. SAMMARAN, DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER SOHELWA WILD LIFE DIVISION DIST. BALRAMPUR

CAPL/63/2025 · 2025-01-10

Manish Kumar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:1775 Court No. - 17 Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 63 of 2025 Applicant :- Jhothu And 2 Others Opposite Party :- Dr. M. Sammaran, Divisional Forest OfÏcer Sohelwa Wild Life Division Dist. Balrampur Counsel for Applicant :- Mayankar Singh Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. The present contempt application has been preferred for non compliance of the judgment and order dated 02.11.2022 passed by the Writ Court. The relevant extract of the aforesaid judgment is quoted hereinbelow:- "Considering the aforesaid facts of the case particularly the fact that the Rules of 2016 does not say that a person engaged by the State Government should be in continuous service with the Government as also the judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioners, this Court is of the view that present petition is liable to be allowed and accordingly, it is allowed. The impugned order dated 17.03.2018, annexed as Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition, is quashed. The respondents are directed to re-consider the case of the petitioners for regularization under the Rules of 2016 in the light of the observations made hereinabove, afresh and pass appropriate order within three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order." It is an admitted case of the applicant that the judgment and order dated 02.11.2022 was served on 17.11.2022 and three months' period had expired on 18.02.2023 and the cause of action arose for the first time on 18.02.2023 after the expiry of three months' period and as per Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, 'no court shall initiate any proceedings for contempt, either on its own motion or otherwise after the expiry of the period of one year from the date on which, the contempt is alleged to have been committed', thus the case is barred by limitation under Section 20 of the Act, 1971. Learned counsel for the applicant is unable to assist the court on the query put by the court to advance the submissions relating to Section 20 of the Act, 1971. In view of above, the present case is barred by Section 20 of the Act, 1971, hence the same is dismissed having approached the Court on 06.01.2025 i.e. after about more than eleven months from the date of expiry of one year period. Order Date :- 10.1.2025 Nitesh Digitally signed by :- NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench