HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 3000 of 2025 Court No. - 8 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned counsel for State. 2. Present contempt petition has been preferred for alleged non- compliance judgment and order dated 02.07.2025 passed in Writ-C No.4409 of 2025; 'Hemant Yadav Vs. State of U.P. and Others'. The relevant extract of the same is quoted herein below:- "6. Considering the submissions made at the Bar, neither the petitioner nor the respondent nos. 8 to 14, as of now are claiming ownership rights over the land which is being used as a pathway. In view thereof, the present petition is disposed of with direction that the land in question shown in the Annexure No. 1 lying in between Gata No. 248 and 223 and going up to Gata No. 224 shall be continued to be used as pathway. Respondent No. 7 shall take steps for filling the same with soil, for the purpose of convenience of the villagers/residents, however, respondent nos. 8 to 14 would be at liberty to institute any proceedings for declaration of their rights, if so advised, as in the said suit the respondent no. 7 shall not take a defence that merely because they have done the work of soil refilling, the claim of the respondent nos. 8 to 14 cannot be considered. It is further clarified that this order shall have no effect on the rights of the petitioner over Gata No. 248 and 246 as owned by the respondent nos. 8 to 14." 3. Learned counsel for respondent has filed compliance affidavit today in Court which is taken on record and enclosing therein the spot memo which was refused to be signed by the applicant, the naksha nazari/spot inspection map and photographs of the filling of the soil as per the judgment and order passed in the writ petition. It is further submitted that the judgment and order passed by the Writ Court has been complied with Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vikas Pandey, O.P. Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Prabhakar Tiwari Hemant Yadav .....Applicant(s) Shri Anupam Shukla, I.A.S., District Magistrate, Ambedkar Nagar And 12 Others .....Opposite Party(s) and present contempt application has become infructuous and it liable to be dismissed as such. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the land which has been shown pathway in the spot inspection map has been closed between Gata No.224 and 247 and soil work has not been done completely up till Gata No.243. 5. After hearing learned counsel parties and going through the record, it is found that there was no direction for taking up pathway up till Gata No.243 as per the judgment and order passed in the writ petition. It is between the Gata No.248 and 223 and going up till Gata No.224 and if there is any dispute of demarcation/boundries which requires leading of evidence, the same could not be seen in the present proceedings, particularly, when the applicant is not disputing the existence of pathway between Gata No.248 and 223 and going up till Gata No.224. 6. In view of the discussions made hereinabove, the judgment and order passed by the Writ Court has been complied with. If the applicant is still aggrieved he may avail other remedies as available to him under the law. 7. Accordingly, the present contempt application is hereby dismissed as infructuous. October 31, 2025 Arti/- CAPL No. 3000 of 2025 2 (Manish Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARTI MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench