HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 3302 of 2026 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant. 2. This application has been filed alleging wilful and deliberate disobedience of the order dated 06.02.2025 passed in Writ-B No. 4448 of 2024. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant filed Writ- B No. 2785 of 2024, at the stage when a revision under Section 48 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act was pending before the Deputy Director Consolidation and while disposing of the writ petition, direction was issued to decide the revision within one month. Simultaneously, an interim protection was granted restraining creation of third party rights and maintenance of status quo on the spot. The said order was passed on 22.07.2024, whereafter the Deputy Director of Consolidation decided the revision on 21.09.2024 remanding the matter to the Consolidation Officer, Etawah and direction for maintenance of status quo as regards nature and possession on the spot was maintained. 4. Submission is that the order of D.D.C. was challenged by the opposite parties No. 1 and 2 by filing Writ-B No. 4448 of 2024 in which, further proceedings pending before the Consolidation Officer have been stayed on 06.02.2025. The petition, was later, on dismissed for want of prosecution on 17.04.2025, however, the order was recalled on 18.08.2025, writ petition was restored and interim order is being extended Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pramod Kumar Singh, Tripathi B.G.Bhai Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Indrajeet .....Applicant(s) Sharda Prasad And 4 Others .....Opposite Party(s) from time to time. 5. Submission is that the writ petition is pending and interim order is being extended and, in the meantime, the status of the plot has been changed in terms of cutting of crops which had been sown and grown by the applicant. Learned counsel has referred to various reports submitted by the revenue authorities as well as police authorities indicating that the applicant has always been in actual and physical possession over the property. Reference of some criminal proceedings has also been made. 6. It is further submitted that by making concealment of all the proceedings, the opposite parties no. 1 and 2 have filed a civil suit, being O.S. No. 54 of 2026 and have obtained an ex-parte ad-interim injunction order on 06.02.2026 wherein also, direction for maintenance of status quo has been passed. It is, therefore, submitted that not only the orders of the writ court but also the civil court have been violated and, therefore, the opposite parties no. 1 and 2 are in contempt. 7. I have thoroughly gone through the record of proceedings and I find that though direction for maintenance of status quo was issued in the writ proceedings, later on, rightly or wrongly a civil suit has been instituted in which there is a clear injunction order in favour of opposite parties no. 1 and 2 and the applicant herein has been restrained from causing interference in the agricultural activities being undertaken by the plaintiffs and from damaging the crops and further maintaining the status quo. 8. This Court, therefore, in contempt proceedings, does not deem it appropriate to examine validity of the interim injunction order dated 06.02.2026 and even if the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant to the effect that civil suit is not maintainable and the injunction order has been obtained by concealment of facts, the Court is of the view that the applicant has a remedy of filing stay vacation application under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC. 9. Such an application has already been filed as Paper 16-C(2), appended at Page-144 of the paper book, wherein passing of various orders by the writ court and other authorities has been taken a ground for vacating the ex-parte ad-interim injunction in terms of Rule 4 of Order XXXIX CPC. CAPL No. 3302 of 2026 2 It appears that the injunction application 7-C is still pending consideration. 10. In order to call upon the opposite parties to face these contempt proceedings, this Court shall have to arrive at a conclusion that they have deliberately disobeyed the orders passed by this Court. When the orders of status quo were passed, the civil suit was not in existence. Considering two separate parts of the ex-parte ad-interim order passed by this Court, it would not be appropriate for this Court to examine the question of violation of an interim order of status quo passed by this Court in separate proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act. 11. It is open for the applicant to bring everything which he relies upon in pending writ petition wherein the order of status quo is being extended from time to time and to seek vacation thereof in the light of subsequent developments. 12. It is also open for the applicant to press application for vacation of ex- parte ad-interim injunction which, if pressed, shall be decided by the civil Court concerned at the earliest on its own merits. 13. The application is disposed of giving liberty to the applicant to avail remedies as already noted above. May 18, 2026 AKShukla/- CAPL No. 3302 of 2026 3 (Kshitij Shailendra,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANIL KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad