Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 170842 (ALL)

SHYAM BAHADUR v. MR. M.P. AGARWAL PRIN. SECY. HIGHER EDU. U.P. LKO. AND 2 OTHERS

CAPL/4864/2024 · 2025-03-11

Manish Kumar

Contempt Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:14740 Court No. - 17 Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4864 of 2024 Applicant :- Shyam Bahadur Opposite Party :- Mr. M.P. Agarwal Prin. Secy. Higher Edu. U.P. Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Prem Shanker Pandey,Abhishek Pandey Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. Dr. Amit Bhardwaj, Director, Higher Educationi Commission, Prayagraj-respondent no.2 has filed an affidavit of compliance, which is taken on record. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed the rejoinder affidavit to the compliance affidavit filed by the respondent no. 1, which is taken on record. Present contempt petition has been preferred for alleged non compliance of the judgment and order of the Writ Court dated 25.09.2024 passed in Writ A No. 4736 of 2024. The relevant extracts of the said judgment which is related to the present applicant is quoted hereinbelow:- "The concerned authority shall also take a decision as to whether the selected candidate Mr. Shyam Bahadur can be adjusted in any other college in the same post in pursuance of his selection. The aforesaid decision shall also be taken in the same time frame. With such directions, the petition stands disposed of." Learned Standing Counsel has submitted that in compliance of the judgment and order passed by the Writ Court, the decision dated 17.12.2024 has been taken in the case of the present applicant that due to the pendency of the writ petition where there is an interim order, the case of the applicant is not possible to be considered. On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that decision taken by the respondent no. 2 is not in consonance with the order passed by the Writ Court in which the applicant was the respondent and there is a willful and intentional disobedience on the part of the respondent no. 2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record of the case, it is found that the Writ Court has directed the respondent no. 2 to take a decision regarding adjustment of the applicant in any other college but the decision has been taken that due to the pendency of the writ petitions, it is not possible to consider the case of the applicant for giving appointment, thus, judgment and order passed by the Writ Court has been complied with as the matter has been considered by authority concerned. In view of the facts and circumstances mentioned hereinabove, the present contempt petition is hereby dismissed as infructuous. Notice issued, if any, stands discharged. Order Date :- 11.3.2025 Ashish Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench