Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:39223 Court No. - 1 Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1159 of 2025 Applicant :- John Symon James And 6 Others Opposite Party :- Mr. Vineet Kumar Counsel for Applicant :- Abhijeet Mishra,Nipun Singh Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J. The present contempt application has been filed pleading willful disobedience of the order dated 16.12.2024 passed by this Court in Writ-C No. 40706 of 2024. A perusal of the records annexed with the affidavit filed in support of the contempt application and the averments made in the affidavit show that there was some dispute regarding the lease rent and other dues payable by the applicants to the Cantonment Board. It also appears that the proceedings for recovery of the amount allegedly due as held by the opposite party were started and the same was challenged by the applicants through Writ-C No. 40706 of 2024. This Court vide its order dated 16.12.2024 reserved the judgement in the aforesaid case and restrained the opposite parties from recovering, till the judgement is pronounced, any amount over and above the lease rent paid by the petitioners during the currency of their lease. The case of the applicants in the present contempt application is that a notice dated 24.2.2025 under Section 7(3) of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as, 'Act, 1971') has been issued to the applicants demanding damages, i.e., the arrears of rent and current year damage. It has also been pleaded that in the notice issued under Section 7(3) of the Act, 1971 the applicants have been declared an unauthorized occupant and for the said reason a notice under Section 4 of the Act, 1971 has also been issued to the applicants. It has been pleaded that for the aforesaid reason, the notice under Section 7(3) of the Act, 1971 is contumacious in nature and in disobedience of the restrain order dated 16.12.2024. I am unable to accept the contention of the counsel for the applicants. No coercive measure under Section 14 of the Act, 1971 has yet been taken to recover any amount from the applicants over and above the lease rent. The notice issued under Section 7(3) of the Act, 1971 by itself does not violates the order of this Court till steps are taken to recover the rent through coercive means under Section 14 of the Act, 1971. Further, no final orders have yet passed declaring the applicants an unauthorized occupant. Only a notice under Section 4 of the Act, 1971 has been issued asking the applicants to submit their reply. The order dated 16.12.2024 passed by this Court did not prohibit institution of proceedings under the Act, 1971. The stand of the opposite party in its notice does not itself amount to contempt till final orders are passed or till coercive steps are taken to recover the amount mentioned in the notice or to evict the applicants from the premises. For the aforesaid reasons, it is not a case to institute proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The contempt application is dismissed. Order Date :- 19.3.2025 Anurag/- Digitally signed by :- ANURAG KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad