KAMLESH AND ANOTHER v. SUDHIR GARG, PRIN. SECY. REVENUE, CIVIL SECRTT., LKO. AND ANOTHER
CAPL/317/2024 · 2025-04-28
Rajeev Singh
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 119065 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 119065 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:24114 Court No. - 17 Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 317 of 2024 Applicant :- Kamlesh And Another Opposite Party :- Sudhir Garg, Prin. Secy. Revenue, Civil Secrtt., Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Piyush Pathak Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants.
2. The instant contempt application has been filed by the applicants alleging disobedience of the order dated 19.09.2023 passed by this Court in Writ-A No. 6675 of 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that as the applicants were not being regularized on the ground that they had crossed the maximum age limit i.e. 45 years, they preferred Writ-A No. 6675 of 2023, which was disposed of on 19.09.2023 in terms of the directions issued vide order dated 31.05.2018 in Writ Petition No. 16741 (S/S) of 2018, but the said order of the writ Court was not complied with by the respondents, hence, the present petition is preferred.
4. Sri Aniruddha Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has filed affidavit of compliance duly signed by Mr. P. Guru Prasad, Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Civil Secretariat, U.P., Lucknow, which is taken on record. Sri Aniruddha Singh submits that decision has already been taken in the case of applicants as it was found that they had worked as seasonal sangrah anusevaks for the period from 1996 to 1998 and after 1998, they never worked, hence, question does not arise for consideration of regularization of the applicants.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants does not dispute the fact that the applicants are not working since 1998 on the basis of age limit. He also submits that the applicants in the year 1998 were aged about 24 and 26 years respectively.
6. In such circumstances, the judgement relied by learned counsel for the applicant is not applicable. Therefore, the contempt application being misconceived stands dismissed. Order Date :- 28.4.2025 Arpan Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench