Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:42951 Court No. - 17 Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 583 of 2025 Applicant :- Subhash Chandra Through Power Of Attorney Holder Arti Devi Opposite Party :- Aman Tyagi Posted As Executive Engineer/ Saksham Adhikar, U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Counsel for Applicant :- Angrej Nath Shukla Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J. 1. Reply filed by the learned counsel for the applicant to the affidavit of compliance filed by the respondent on 15.07.2025 is taken on record. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that since the grievance of the applicant was not being considered, he preferred Writ-C No. 9596 of 2023, which was disposed of vide judgment and order dated 02.11.2023 with the direction to the competent authority to consider the representation of the applicant/petitioner by passing reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law. It is further submitted that in pursuance of the order of writ Court, the applicant moved representation along with a certified copy of the order to the respondent through registered post on 29.07.2024. However, since the order of writ Court was not being complied with, the present contempt application has been filed. 3. Shri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, while filing affidavit of compliance duly sworn by the respondent-Mr. Aman Tyagi, Executive Engineer, Construction Division, U.P. Avas Evam Vikash Parishad, Ayodhya, submits that the order of the writ Court has been complied with, as the decision has already been taken on the representation of the applicant on 23.07.2025. It is, thus, submitted that the application has lost its efficacy and may be dismissed. The affidavit of compliance is taken on record. 4. At this stage, Shri Angrej Nath Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the representation of the applicant has not been decided by the respondent- authority in correct perspective. 5. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel appearing for the respondent and going through the order of the writ Court as well as contents of the affidavit of compliance and the reply filed by the applicant, this Court is of the view that the decision has already been taken by the respondent on the representation moved by the applicant vide order dated 23.07.2025. 6. The application, accordingly, stands dismissed as infructuous. 7. However, it is always open to the applicant to avail appropriate remedy against the decision taken by the respondent before appropriate forum, if he is feeling so aggrieved. Order Date :- 25.7.2025 VKS Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench