Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10520 Court No. - 17 Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4807 of 2024 Applicant :- Shyam Jee Bharti Opposite Party :- Sri Avanish Tripathi, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Sadar Gonda Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Kumar Singh Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. Supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. The present contempt application has been preferred for alleged non compliance of judgment and order dated 12.11.2024 passed by the writ Court. The relevant extract of the same is quoted hereinbelow:- "3. Considering the facts of the petitioner, we dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: (i) The Sub-Divisional Magistrate concerned shall get an spot inspection conducted within fifteen days to ascertain as to whether there is any encroachment on the Sarkari Nali as alleged. (ii) If the team constituted by him finds any such encroachment then he shall immediately ensure remedial measures to remove the encroachment or blockage etc. He shall find a permanent solution to this problem as far as possible. (ii) This exercise shall be completed within the time limit as mentioned above." Learned Standing Counsel on the basis of instructions dated 06.02.2025 (which is taken on record) received from the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar Gonda i.e. the respondent has submitted that on 14.12.2024, Naali was demarcated by the Gram Panchayat Adhikari in the presence of the respondent and thereafter it was cleaned i.e. the encroachement/blockage were removed and the Spot Memo Report is signed by the Rajashva Team, Police Team, the applicant i.e. Shyam Jee Bharti and Panchayat Vibhag and the photographs of the spot dated 14.12.2024 have also been enclosed along with the instructions. On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicant has firstly, submitted that it is not the signature of the applicant which has been mentioned in the Spot Memo but the said submission of learned counsel for the applicant is found to be incorrect as per the supplementary affidavit filed by the applicant in which he has enclosed the copy of the representation dated 14.12.2024 mentioning therein that forcibly his signature was taken on the plain paper. Such a misleading statement made by the learned counsel for the applicant though he was very well aware that a representation was made by the applicant that the signature was taken on the plain paper even then, making a submission that it is not the signature of the applicant is highly deprecated. It is not expected from the learned counsel who is representing the case. Fair assistance is always expected by the Court, which is not there in the present case rather a contradictory arguement was made on behalf of the appellant. The judgment and order passed by the writ Court has been complied with even. In view of the aforesaid, the present contempt application has become infructuous and as such it is dismissed as infructuous. Notice, if any, stands discharged. Order Date :- 18.2.2025 Nitesh Digitally signed by :- NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench