HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2984 of 2026 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J. 1. The applicant, before this Court, had purchased a flat from one Skynet Infraventures Pvt. Ltd. Upon the project having been completed, possession of the flat was handed over but there are certain unconstructed areas left in the apartment which need to be addressed by private builder. 2. The applicant had approached the writ Court through Writ-C No. 34859 of 2025 which was disposed of on 14.10.2025 relying upon the Division Bench judgment rendered in Writ-C No. 13298 of 2020 (Shipra Shishty Apartment vs. State of U.P. and 2 others), decided on 05.01.2021, which reads as under:- "1. Mr. Mangla Prasad Rai, learned senior advocate assisted by Mr. Ravindra Tiwari, appear on behalf of petitioners. He submits, his clients had paid good money for purchasing flats. Private respondent no.5 has not completed the construction. Accordingly, his clients seek direction upon respondent no.3 (Prayagraj Development Authority) to compel the developer to complete the construction. 2. He relies on order dated 5th January, 2021 of a Division Bench of this Court, disposing of Writ C no. 13298 of 2020 (Shipra Srishty Apartment Vs. State of U.P. and 2 others). He submits, same directions be made in his clients' writ petition. 3. Mr. Raj Mohan Upadhyay, learned advocate, Additional Chief Standing Counsel appears on behalf of State. Mr. Shashwat Pratap, Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pavan Kumar Pandey, Ravindra Tiwari, Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ravindra Tiwari .....Applicant(s) Smt. Saumya Agarwal, Chairman/ Commissioner, Prayagraj Divelopment Authority And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) learned advocate holding the brief appears on behalf of respondent no.3. Mr. Ravi Prakash Pandey, learned advocate appears on behalf of respondent no.4 (the Nagar Nigam). 4. We do not deem it necessary to direct issuance of notice on respondent no.5 (the builder). Instead, we dispose of the writ petition as covered by said order dated 5th January, 2021 (supra). Directions made in said order are deemed to have been made herein. In complying with the directions, concerned authority will notice private respondent no.5. Petitioners will communicate certified copy of this order to respondent no.3. 5. The writ petition is disposed of." 3. It appears that the writ Court had not issued any direction for issuance of notice to private builder and had left the matter to be considered by Prayagraj Development Authority. 4. In view of said fact, prima facie, no case for contempt is made out. 5. However, Vice Chairman, Prayagraj Development Authority, Prayagraj shall try to comply the directions of writ Court as far as possible in issuance of notice to private builder, within a period of three months, from the date of production of certified copy of this order. 6. With the aforesaid direction, the contempt application stands disposed of. May 5, 2026 (V. S. SINGH) CAPL No. 2984 of 2026 2 (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIDYA SAGAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad