Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:1880 Court No. - 17 Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2578 of 2024 Applicant :- Suman Kumari Opposite Party :- Santosh Kumar Rai, Distt. Basic Education Officer, Distt. Ayodhya Counsel for Applicant :- Rankaj Kumar Vishwakarma,Santosh Kumar Gupta Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. Shri Ravi Prakash Yadav, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of respondent, which is taken on record. Heard Shri Santosh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Ravi Prakash Yadav, learned counsel for the respondent. Present contempt petition has been preferred for non compliance of the judgment and order dated 19.12.2023 passed in Writ A No. 9730 of 2023. The relevant excerpts of the said judgment and order is being extracted hereinbelow:- "It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of either of the parties on merits and the authority concerned shall be free to decide the matter strictly in accordance with law. With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of." Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that till date no compliance affidavit has been filed by the respondent. On the other hand, Shri Ravi Prakash Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent on the basis of instructions received has submitted that the representation of the applicant has already been decided by order dated 20.08.2024 in compliance of the judgment and order passed by the Writ Court. It is further submitted that against the said order dated 20.08.2024, applicant has preferred a petition bearing Writ A No. 10792 of 2024 (Suman Kumari Vs. State of U.P. and others), hence the judgment and order of the Writ Court has been complied with and the remedy available has already been availed by the applicant by filing a writ petition. Learned Counsel for the applicant has not disclosed these material facts before this Court rather pressing his submission that till date compliance affidavit has not been filed though the applicant as well as Shri Santosh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant are having full knowledge of the passing of the order dated 20.08.2024 rejecting the representation of the applicant. After rejection of the representation, a writ petition has also been filed by the applicant keeping the same counsel who is appearing in the present case. Despite all these things, the learned counsel for the applicant has chosen not to assist the Court fairly and pressing the submission that compliance affidavit has not been filed by the respondent so far so the order passed by the Writ Court has not been complied with. Fairness is expected from the members of the Bar. Hence the said conduct from Shri Santosh Kumar Gupta, Advocate is deprecated, who despite the knowledge of the fact that the representation has already been decided, suppressed this fact and did not inform the Court, more particularly when against the decision on representation the writ petition was filed, he was the counsel, who filed the writ petition. In view of the facts and circumstances of the present case, the case is dismissed as the judgment and order of the Writ Court has already been complied with. Order Date :- 10.1.2025 Ashish Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench