HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2040 of 2024 Court No. - 8 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J. Heard. Present contempt application has been preferred for non-compliance of the judgment and order dated 19.01.2024 passed by Writ Court in Public Interest Litigation No. 45 of 2024. The relevant part of the said judgment and order dated 19.01.2024 is being reproduced hereinbelow:- "7. Accordingly, without entering into merits of the case, the writ petition, is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to move an application before the competent authority and in case such an application is made the said authority is directed to proceed to consider and decide the same expeditiously in accordance with law." Learned Standing Counsel has submitted that a compliance affidavit has already been filed in the present case wherein it has been mentioned that the alleged encroachment was actually not a encroachment in all the plots mentioned in the order passed by the Writ Court as in most of the plots, the land was entered in the names of some persons. The details thereof have been given therein and where there was encroachment, the proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 were initiated and decided. It is further submitted that the applicant had not approached the Writ Court with clean hands as the applicant had suppressed material facts that the lands which were mentioned in the judgment and order of the Writ Court are entered in the names of tenure holders. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rama Niwas Pathak, Raghaw Ram Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Jagdish .....Applicant(s) Ms. Aakriti Srivastava Tehsildar Sarojini Nagar Lucknow .....Opposite Party(s) On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that against the compliance affidavit, objection has been filed mentioning therein that the name of the persons have wrongly been entered into the revenue records. On being asked whether revenue entry made in the revenue record could be seen under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, he has very fairly submitted that it would not be seen under the aforesaid proceedings meaning thereby, learned counsel for the applicant is unable to dispute that those entries can not be looked into the proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. Learned Counsel for the applicant has further submitted that after the passing of the order under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 till date no encroachment has been removed, for that, applicant has remedy under para 460 of U.P. Revenue Court Manual. In view of the facts and circumstances mentioned hereinabove, the present contempt application has become infructuous and the same is dismissed as such. Notice issued, if any, stands discharged. October 14, 2025 Ashish CAPL No. 2040 of 2024 2 (Manish Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench