HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1624 of 2025 Court No. - 8 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J. Vakalatnama filed by Sri Satyanshu Ojha, Advocate on behalf of the respondent is taken on record. The present contempt application has been preferred for alleged non compliance of the judgment and order dated 04.02.2025. The relevant extract of the same is quoted hereinbelow:- "In view of the above, it is provided that in case the petitioner submits a representation within two weeks from today before the respondent no.2 then the respondent no.2 shall endevour to decide the same by means of a reasoned and speaking order within a further period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order along with representation." Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that in compliance of the judgment and order dated 04.02.2025, the representation of the applciant has been decided by order dated 15.07.2025. Copy of which has been provided during course of the argument which is taken on the record and the photocopy of the same has been provided to learned counsel for the applicant today itself. Though, the copy has already been sent to the applicant by post, hence the judgment and order passed by the writ Court has been complied with as such the present contempt application has become infructuous and the same may be dismissed as infructuous. On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the judgment and order passed by the writ Court has not been complied with as it could be seen from the order dated 15.07.2025 itself, wherein it has been mentioned that the decision would be taken as per the final decision in Writ A No. 2701 of 2024 filed by the applicant, meaning hereby, the representation of the applicant has not been decided, hence, this is a wilful disobedience of the order passed in the writ petition and the respondent is liable to be punished under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record of the case, it is found that there was a direction for deciding the representation of the applicant. From perusal of the order dated 15.07.2025 i.e. the decision on the representation of the applicant, the same has been decided and the reference of Writ A No. 2701 of 2024 filed by the applicant is only to the extent Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Raj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Satyanshu Ojha Narendra Kumar Srivastava .....Applicant(s) Sri Bijendra Singh, Vice Chancelloe Acharya Narendra Dev Unive. Of Agri. And Techno. Distt. Ayodhya .....Opposite Party(s) that if there is any due or remaining payment is there, the same would be paid as per the decision in the said writ petition, as such, it is not that due to the pendency of Writ A No. 2701 of 2024, the representation of the applicant was not decided as argued by learned counsel for the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant has also forwarded a letter dated 13.08.2025 written by the Deputy Director, Pension to the Finance Controller, University stating therein that earlier the pension of the applicant was fixed on the last pay drawn as Rs. 52,000/- but after passing of the order by the writ Court, the revised pension which was forwarded wherein the last salary drawn by the applicant has been shown as Rs. 50,500/- and he has asked as to how the recovery could be made may also be suggested. The said letter is taken on record. This document is not at all to be said that the decision taken by the respondent is not the compliance of the judgment and order dated 04.02.2025, whereby there was a simple direction of deciding the representation which has been decided by the respondent. In view of the discussion made hereinabove, the present contempt application is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. Notice, if any, stands discharged. November 4, 2025 Nitesh CAPL No. 1624 of 2025 2 (Manish Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench