RENU SINGH AND ANOTHER v. SANJAY KUMAR SINGH, TEHSILDAR, TEHSIL SADAR
CAPL/1549/2025 · 2025-04-07
Salil Kumar Rai
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 35103 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 35103 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:50118 Court No. - 1 Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1549 of 2025 Applicant :- Renu Singh And Another Opposite Party :- Sanjay Kumar Singh, Tehsildar, Tehsil Sadar Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Raj Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J. Heard the counsel for the applicants. The present contempt application has been filed pleading willful disobedience of the order dated 3.9.2024 passed by this Court in Writ - C No. 22670 of 2024. A perusal of the order-sheet of the case in the court below indicates that the case could not be taken up on many dates because the members of the Bar had abstained from judicial work. The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that the recital in the order-sheet that the members of the Bar had abstained from work is wrong and in support of their contention, the counsel for the applicants has drawn the attention of the Court towards the signatures of the counsel for the applicants in the court below on the order-sheet of the different dates when the case was adjourned because the members were on strike. It has been argued that for the aforesaid reason, the opposite party is liable to be summoned and prosecuted for Contempt of Court. The contention of the counsel for the applicants is not acceptable. A recital in the order-sheet of a case by a Tribunal cannot be challenged on affidavit. The only remedy before a litigant is to file a review application for review of the recital / observations noted in the order-sheet. There is nothing on record to indicate that the applicants had filed any review application against the recitals in the order-sheet. Apart from the aforesaid, a perusal of the endorsements by the counsel for the applicants in the Court / Tribunal does not indicate that the counsel for the applicants had appeared in the case to argue it on behalf of his clients. The signatures were made with the endorsement that the subsequent dates have been noted by the counsel for the applicants. On 12th November, 2024, the counsel
for the applicants endorses that the date for 19th November, 2024 has been noted. Similar endorsement has been made on other dates also. The contempt application is not maintainable and dismissed. Order Date :- 8.4.2025 Satyam Digitally signed by :- SATYAM AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad