GOPAL KRISHNA TIWARI v. SRI AMIT KUMAR MISRA, FINANCE AND ACCOUNTS OFFICER (BASIC), SULTANPUR AND ANOTHER
CAPL/3816/2024 · 2025-10-16
Manish Kumar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 202025 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 202025 (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. - 3816 of 2024 Court No. - 8 HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J.
1. Learned counsel for respondent has filed an affidavit of compliance, which is taken on record.
2. Learned counsel for respondent has submitted that in pursuance of the
judgment and order dated 22.04.2024 a decision dated 23.08.2024 has been taken on the representation of the applicant.
3. Learned counsel for applicant has submitted that despite the order passed by the Writ Court, the gratuity has not been paid to the applicant.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for parties going through the record of the case, it is found that this Court vide its order dated 22.04.2024 has
directed to take decision on the representation of the applicant regarding payment of gratuity, the relevant extract of the order dated 22.04.2024 is quoted hereinbelow:-
"In view of the aforesaid, the petitioner is permitted to make detailed representation with respect to claim of gratuity before the competent authority within a period of 15 days and if such claim is raised, the competent authority is directed to take decision for payment of gratuity within next period of four weeks."
5. There is only a direction for taking decision on the representation of the petitioner regarding claim of the payment of gratuity of the applicant. The legality of the rejection order or denial of payment of gratuity to the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ram Lagan Misra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Shailendra Singh Rajawat Gopal Krishna Tiwari .....Applicant(s) Sri Amit Kumar Misra, Finance And Accounts Officer (Basic), Sultanpur And Another .....Opposite Party(s)
applicant cannot be seen by the contempt court. The judgment and order passed by the Writ Court has been complied with.
6. In view of the facts and discussion made hereinabove, the present contempt application has become infructuous and the same is dismissed as infructuous.
7. Notice issued earlier, if any, stands discharged. October 16, 2025 Satish CAPL No. 3816 of 2024 2 (Manish Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench