Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:14765 Court No. - 17 Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 649 of 2025 Applicant :- Mata Prasad Tiwari Opposite Party :- Nisha Anant, District Magistrate Amethi And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Jaganniwas Mishra,Mahesh Kumar Kaushal Man Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. 1. The present contempt application has been preferred for the alleged non-compliance of the judgment and order dated 11.02.2025. For convenience, the relevant portion of the said order is quoted hereinbelow:- "14. We dispose of this writ petition with the observation/direction that the concerned constructing agency shall undertake the construction of the drain as mentioned in the map by the Block Development Officer (not otherwise). The Block Development Officer shall communicate our order as also his report dated 08.01.2025 and the map prepared by him to the concerned officials of the Kshetra Panchayat and to the Sub Divisional Magistrate and Station House Officer of Police Station- Amethi for ensuring compliance. Shri Mata Prasad Tiwari or any other villager will not create any hurdle whatsoever in construction of the drain and, if any, such hurdle is created then the local police and district authorities shall immediately respond and take appropriate action, however, our order nor the construction of the drain in any manner affects the temple premises and any property situated within the premises. The videograpy prepared by the Block Development Officer regarding the exercise conducted shall be retained by him and the photographs have already been filed here." 2. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that as per the report which was placed before the writ court no soakpit has been constructed on gata no. 773. There is also some difference in distance between the temple and the drain. The drain is to be covered but it is open. In support of his submission, he has drawn attention of the court to the photographs which have been annexed as Annexure no. 2 to the affidavit filed alongwith the contempt application. 3. After hearing learned counsel for the applicant and perusal of the photographs, it is found that the work has yet not been completed it is still going on and the distance could not be seen in the contempt proceedings as no distance has been mentioned in the judgment and order of the writ court.. The applicant has jumped to the conclusion prior to the completion of the work that the drain will not be covered. 4. On being asked as to how this court could see the soakpit is not constructed on gata no. 773, he has also failed to show any document for the same. 5. In view of the facts and circumstances discussed hereinabove, it is found that these all are disputed questions of fact and these cannot be seen in the contempt proceedings. Thus, the present contempt application is misconceived hence dismissed. Order Date :- 11.3.2025 DiVYa Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench