SAMMUKH LAND DEVELOPERS PROMOTERS PVT. THRU. ITS DIRECTOR PANKAJ JAISWAL AND ANOTHER v. SHRI ANUPAM SHUKLA, COLLECTOR / DIST. MAGISTRATE AMBEDKAR NAGAR
CAPL/3069/2025 · 2025-12-11
Manish Kumar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 194931 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 194931 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 3069 of 2025 Court No. - 8 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J.
1. Compliance affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. The present contempt application has been preferred for the alleged non- compliance of the judgment and order dated 02.02.2024, passed in Writ C No. 541 of 2024. The relevant portion of the said judgment is quoted hereinbelow:-
" 27. Keeping in view of the aforesaid discussion, the writ petition is allowed. The order impugned dated 21.12.2023, copy of which is annexure 1 to the petition, is quashed. The matter is remitted to the competent authority i.e. respondent No.1 to pass a fresh order after due opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned in accordance with law which order would be passed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. "
3. Learned State Counsel has submitted that in compliance of the judgment and order dated 02.02.2024, after providing opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, who had been represented through their counsel, the case has been decided by passing an order dated 29.10.2025, the copy of which has been enclosed as Annexure No. 1 to the compliance affidavit, hence the present contempt application is liable to be dismissed. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the decision taken by the opposite party is not on the basis of the direction issued by the writ court. 5. The said submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is not sustainable for the reason that the writ court has only directed to decide the matter afresh after providing opportunity of hearing to the parties, and the same has been decided by providing opportunity of hearing, which is not Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mahendra Pratap Singh, Chandan Srivastava, Dipesh Shukla, Poonam Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :
Sammukh Land Developers Promoters Pvt. Thru. Its Director Pankaj Jaiswal And Another .....Applicant(s) Shri Anupam Shukla, Collector / Dist. Magistrate Ambedkar Nagar .....Opposite Party(s)
disputed by the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned counsel for the applicant could not point out as to in what manner the direction passed by the Writ Court had not been complied with. 6. Accordingly, the present contempt application is dismissed as infructuous. 7. Notice, if any, stand discharged.
December 11, 2025 DiVYa CAPL No. 3069 of 2025 2 (Manish Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench