HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 6526 of 2026 Court No. - 53 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. The present contempt application has been preferred alleging willful defiance of the order dated 30.04.2026 passed in Writ-A No. 6290 of 2026, order whereof is quoted herein under:- "1. The petitioner has preferred present writ petition inter-alia with the following prayer :- " (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent authorities to take into the consideration with respect to the service period spent by the petitioner, while undergoing training after his appointment and before appointed as Constable for calculating 19 years of service for grant of one additional increment/selection grade in light of the G.O. dated 02.12.2000 issued by the State Government."2. It is argued by Sri Abhishek Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners that in identical facts and circumstances of the case an order dated 29.11.2022 was passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ A No.10547 of 2019 (Charan Singh and 20 others Vs. State of U.P. And 5 others). The order dated 29.11.2022 reads as follows :- "Controversy raised in the present petition has already been adjudicated by this Court in Writ Petition No. 44330 of 2012 (Ghanshyam Tiwari & others vs. State of U.P. & others) against which a special appeal and S.L.P. has already been rejected. Order dated 07.09.2012 passed in aforesaid writ petition reads as under:- "The sole grievance raised of the petitioners in the present petition is as to whether the period spent on training prior to appointment as a Constable in the Police Department can be counted for granting them promotional pay scale. I have heard Shri Rajesh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners. This issue was examined by this Court in Writ Petition No. 24910 of 2006 and the petition was allowed with the following observations:- "Thus, for the reasons stated above, the respondents are not justified in not counting Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishek Mishra, Prakhar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ajay Kumar .....Applicant(s) Shri Akhilesh Kumar Chaurasia, Deputy Inspector General Of Police (Establishment), Police Headquarter And Another .....Opposite Party(s) the period spent in training for the purposes of calculating 24 years of service for grant of promotional pay scale to the petitioners. The writ petition is allowed with a direction to the respondents to count the training period of the petitioners for the purposes of granting second promotional pay scale." Thus, for the reasons stated in the judgment and order dated 8th April, 2009 passed in the aforesaid Writ Petition No. 24910 of 2006, this petition deserves to be allowed and is allowed. The respondents shall count the training period of the petitioners for the purposes of granting additional increment." Following the order passed in the aforesaid matter, this writ petition is also disposed of with the direction that the petitioners' claim for grant of Additional increment shall be considered within a period of three months after taking into account the training period for the purposes of grant of such benefit." 3. It is admitted between the parties that the controversy involved in the present petition is identical as in the case of Charan Singh (supra) hence petitioners are also entitled for the same relief. 4. Following the order passed in the aforesaid matter, this writ petition is also disposed of with the direction that the petitioners' claim for grant of Additional increment shall be considered within a period of three months after taking into account the training period for the purposes of grant of such benefit." 2. Today, instructions have been produced dated 30.09.2026 annexing therewith the order dated 24.09.2026 deciding the claim of the applicant, and on page, it is shown that an amount of Rs.2,93,707.00 stands credited in the bank account of the applicant. 3. Since the order of the Writ-Court has been substantially complied with, the contempt application is consigned to record, leaving it open for the applicant to question the quantum of same. 4. Let a copy of the instructions be served upon the counsel for the applicant. 5. Instructions filed today are taken on record and marked as Appendix 'A'. October 1, 2026 N.S.Rathour CAPL No. 6526 of 2026 2 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad