MANOJ KUMAR PANDEY and ORS. v. SUSHRI VEENA KUMARI ADDL.CHIEF SECY.CONSUMER PROTECT.and ORS.
CAPL/1594/2021 · 2025-11-10
Manish Kumar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 173468 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 173468 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1594 of 2021 Court No. - 8 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J. Respondent no. 9 has filed a compliance affidavit which is taken on record. Learned Standing Counsel has submitted that the applicants have been paid Grade Pay of Rs. 2400/- w.e.f. the date of service of judgment. On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants are entitled for the payment of Grade Pay of Rs. 2400/- w.e.f. the G.O. dated 10.01.2016 whereas no such direction is there in the order passed in the writ petition otherwise for all practical purposes, the present contempt application has become infructuous and the same may be dismissed as infructuous but liberty may be given to the applicants to challenge the same by filing a writ petition, if they are still aggrieved. In view of above, the present contempt application is dismissed as infructuous. Notice if any, stands discharged. It is always open for the applicants to avail the remedy, as may be permissible under the law for which no separate order is required to be passed. November 10, 2025 Nitesh Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Raj Kumar Upadhyaya R.K. Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :
(Manish Kumar,J.) Manoj Kumar Pandey And Ors. .....Applicant(s) Sushri Veena Kumari Addl.Chief Secy.Consumer Protect.And Ors. .....Opposite Party(s) Digitally signed by :- NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench