HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 3467 of 2025 Court No. - 8 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J. The present contempt application has been preferred for alleged non compliance of the judgment and order dated 12.04.2024 passed in Writ C No. 3386 of 2024, whereby the writ Court has directed the District Magistrate to decide the representation of the application within a period of four weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him. The relevant part of the order dated 12.04.2024 is quoted hereinbelow:- "4. This petition is disposed of with a direction to the District Magistrate, Hardoi to look into the representation of the petitioner dated 22.03.2024 and pass an order, in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him. " Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the copy of the judgment and order dated 12.04.2024 passed in the writ petition was served upon the respondent on 18.07.2024 and thereafter, the reminder was sent on 18.07.2025 but till date the order passed in the writ petition has not been complied with. From perusal of the record of the case, it is found that the alleged representation along with the certified copy of the order dated 12.04.2024 which has been enclosed as annexure no. 2, neither there is any reference/mention nor the certified copy of judgment and order dated 12.04.2024 passed in the writ petition was enclosed. Even in the enclosures, the same has not been shown to be filed along with the alleged representation dated 18.07.2024. Neither there is any endorsement of receiving nor any postal receipt have been enclosed to show that the representation was served upon the respondent. The reminder was sent after one year i.e. on 18.07.2025 by registered post. If the representation dated 18.07.2024 could not be treated as service of the judgment and order passed in the writ petition upon the respondent, the representation dated 18.07.2025 was made after fifteen months of the judgment passed in the writ petition. If the period is to be seen from 18.07.2024, four weeks' period has already expired on 18.08.2024 and the representation made on 18.07.2025 which is even after the expiry of fifteen months. Learned Standing counsel has submitted that the present contempt Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishek Singh, Dhruv Ashish Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Molhe .....Applicant(s) Shri Anunaya Jha, District Magistrate Hardoi .....Opposite Party(s) application is barred by Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, as for the first time cause of action arose on 12.05.2024 and the present contempt application has been filed on 17.10.2025 i.e. after expiry of one year and five months' period from the date when the cause of action first arose. On being asked from the learned counsel for the applicant to address the Court on Section 20 of the Act, 1971, learned counsel for the applicant is unable to assist the court on the query put by the court to advance the submissions relating to Section 20 of the Act, 1971. After hearing learned counsel for the applicant and going through the record of the case, it is an admitted case of the applicant that for the first time the contempt has alleged to have been committed on 12.05.2024 and as per Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the contempt petition is to be filed within a period of one year from the date the contempt has alleged to have been committed. For convenience, the Section 20 of the Contempt Courts Act, 1971 is being reproduced hereinbelow:- "20. Limitation for actions for contempt:- No court shall initiate any proceedings of contempt, either on its own motion or otherwise, after the expiry of a period of one year from the date on which the contempt is alleged to have been committed." Further, in the case of Islammudin vs. Umesh Chandra Tiwari and Anr. [2009 (5) ADJ 656 (DB)], the Division Bench of this Court has held that the law laid down by the Apex Court in Pallav Sheth vs. Costodian and Ors. [(2001) 7 SCC 549] does not make Section 5 of the Act 1963 applicable and would not confer power upon the Court to condone or waive delay where proceedings of contempt are sought to be initiated under the Act, 1971 after one year from the date when the contempt is alleged to have been committed. In the present case, the contempt has alleged to have been committed on 12.05.2024 whereas the present contempt petition has been preferred after the expiry of more than one year and five months i.e. on 17.10.2025. Hence, it is barred by Section 20 of the Contempt Courts Act, 1971. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present contempt application is dismissed. October 31, 2025 Nitesh CAPL No. 3467 of 2025 2 (Manish Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench