HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 6752 of 2026 Court No. - 53 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. The present contempt application has been preferred alleging wilful defiance of the order dated 09.06.2025 passed in Writ-C No. 19180 of 2025, order whereof is quoted hereinunder.- "1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondent nos.1 to 4 and Sri R. P. Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent no.5. 2. In view of the order proposed to be passed herein, no useful purpose would be served by putting the private respondent to notice and keeping this petition pending before this Court. However, in case private respondent feels aggrieved by the order his right to seek modification/variation of the order is being kept reserved. 3. The petitioner has preferred present writ petition inter-alia with the following prayers :- "(i) Issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding/directing the Respondent nos. 3 & 4 to make compliance of the order dated 7.7.2023 passed by Tahsildar, Tehsil- Sadar, District- Mau in Case No. 01446/2020 (Computerikrit Case No. T202015510101446 (Report Vs. Subash) under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 (Annexure no. 4 to this writ petition) and thereafter submit the compliance report before this Hon'ble Court." 4. It is argued by counsel for the petitioner that though a considerable time has already lapsed but till date no decision has been taken by the revenue authorities to execute the aforesaid order. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 6. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is disposed of directing the concerned respondent to execute the aforesaid order strictly in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jitendra Rana Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Subash Chauhan .....Applicant(s) Kunwar Sachin Singh And 4 Others .....Opposite Party(s) order unless there is no legal impediment." 2. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant herein happens to be respondent No. 6 in Writ-C No. 19180 of 2025 and the said petition was filed by one Bachiya Devi. According to the learned counsel for the applicant, the said petition came to be filed for execution of the order dated 07.07.2023 passed by Tehsildar, Tehsil Sadar, District Mau in Case No. 01446 of 2020, Computerized Case No. T202015510101446, (Bachiya Devi Vs. Subhash) under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code and in the operative portion of the said judgment, the opposite parties were directed to execute the aforesaid order strictly in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order unless there is any legal impediment. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has invited the attention of the Court towards page 31 of the paper book so as to contend that a recall application has been preferred by the applicant herein for recalling of the order dated 09.06.2025 passed in Writ-C No. 19180 of 2025 and further so far as the order dated 07.07.2023 is concerned, the same was subject matter of challenge by the applicant herein before the Collector, Mau in Case No. 1122 of 2025 under Section 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code in an appeal and the appeal was partially allowed on 19.12.2025. But, now, despite the direction of the Court to execute the order dated 07.07.2023 unless there is legal impediment, no demolition exercise could have been conducted and according to him, on 01.07.2026, the house of the applicant has been demolished. Thus, there happens to be gross contempt of the order of the Court. 4. In the opinion of the Court, the order dated 09.06.2025 passed in Writ-C No. 19180 of 2025 was in a petition preferred by Bachiya Devi and the applicant herein was made respondent No. 6 in the said petition and by way of the said order, direction was issued to the opposite parties to execute the order dated 07.07.2023 unless there is no legal impediment. The date on which the order came to be passed i.e. 09.06.2025 in Writ-C No. 19180 of 2025, there was no order under Section 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code as the said order came to be passed on 19.12.2025, though a recall application is claimed to be pending till date. The applicant, might be right that once the order dated 19.12.2025 came to be passed in appeal under Section 67(5) of the U.P. Revenue Code partially setting aside the order dated 07.07.2023, CAPL No. 6752 of 2026 2 then there was no occasion for the opposite party to have proceeded to adopt coercive measures against the applicant on 01.07.2026, but that goes to the merits of the matter which is not required to be dealt with in the present proceedings in contempt jurisdiction. 5. Accordingly, the contempt application is consigned to record, leaving it open for the applicant to take appropriate remedy as permissible under law questioning the conduct of the opposite parties. September 24, 2026 Rajesh CAPL No. 6752 of 2026 3 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad