Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 189033 (ALL)

GIRDHARI LAL GUPTA v. RAHUL SINGH, TEHSILDAR, TEHSIL MUSAFIRKHANA DIST. AMETHI

CAPL/3696/2025 · 2025-11-18

Manish Kumar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 3696 of 2025 Court No. - 8 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J. Heard. The present contempt application has been preferred for alleged non- compliance of the judgment and order dated 11.07.2025 whereby the Writ Court directed the respondent to decide the proceedings pending under Section 33/34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006 within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order before the respondents. It was further directed to the respective parties of the case to cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment, neither any such adjournment shall be granted by the Court concerned, except in exceptional circumstances. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the copy of the judgment and order was served upon respondent on 21.07.2025, thereafter three months date has already expired on 19/20.10.2025 but till date no final order has been passed, as directed by the Writ Court, hence, the respondent is willfully and intentionally disobeying the judgment and order of the Writ Court, thus, he is liable to punish under the relevant provisions of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. After hearing learned counsel for the applicant and perusing the material Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ram Bahadur Maurya, Anil Kumar Mishra, Arun Chand Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Girdhari Lal Gupta .....Applicant(s) Rahul Singh, Tehsildar, Tehsil Musafirkhana Dist. Amethi .....Opposite Party(s) available on record particularly copy of the order sheet filed by the applicant, it is found that after service of the order, ten dates were fixed and out of which on eight dates, lawyers either abstaining from judicial work or there were Shok prastava. Under the aforesaid circumstances, the delay in taking final decision cannot be attributable to the respondent and it cannot be said that the respondent is willfully or intentionally disobeying the judgment and order passed by the Writ Court. In view of the aforesaid, the present contempt application is hereby dismissed. November 18, 2025 Ashish CAPL No. 3696 of 2025 2 (Manish Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench