HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2903 of 2024 Court No. - 8 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J. 1. The respondent has filed compliance affidavit, which is taken on record. 2. Learned Standing Counsel has submitted that earlier also the compliance affidavit was filed giving details of payment made to the applicant after reinstatement in service but the learned counsel for the applicant has disputed that he is entitled for backwages which were given to one Shri Pramod Prasad. So this Court has granted time to the respondents to file further compliance affidavit pertaining to the payment of backwages. In pursuance thereof the backwages has been paid to the applicant to the tune of Rs.35,14,300/- and the same has been credited in the account of the applicant, which has been enclosed as Annexure A-1 to the compliance affidavit. 3. On the other hand learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that it is alright that the amount would have been paid but there is no details how the same was calculated. There may be a chance that the applicant would be entitled for some more amount of backwages, hence, the judgment and order passed in the writ petition has not been complied with. 4. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record of the case, it is found that the judgment and order passed in the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sant Lal Dixit, Himanshu Kamboj Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Nar Singh Yadav .....Applicant(s) Shri Sanjay Prasad, Prin. Secy. Home, Govt. Of U.P., Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) writ petition in the case of the application to take decision on the representation of the applicant in the light of judgement and order dated 07.08.2019 passed in Writ Petition No.25313 (S/S) of 20218 (Nar Singh Yadav vs. State of U.P. & others). In the case of Nar Singh Yadav vs. State of U.P. & others, the benefit of the judgement passed in the case of Pramod Prasad has been given to reinstate in service with all consequential benefits, therefore, all the consequential benefits have been given to the applicant. If there is any dispute regarding determination of the same, the dispute of determination of amount cannot be seen in the contempt proceedings. The judgement and order passed in the writ petition has been complied with and the present contempt application has become infructuus and it is, hereby, dismissed as infructuous. 5. Notice, if any, issued against the respondent stands discharged. November 13, 2025 S. Kumar CAPL No. 2903 of 2024 2 (Manish Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- SANTOSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench