Rameshwar Dixit vs Vinay Mittal & 4 Ors.
2013 Latest Caselaw 2623 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 26
 

 
Case :- CONTEMPT No. - 1202 of 2013
 

 
Petitioner :- Rameshwar Dixit
 
Respondent :- Vinay Mittal & 4 Ors.
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Akhilesh Kalra,Avinash Chandra
 

 
Hon'ble Ajai Lamba,J.

This petition has been filed with a plea that order of this court dated 23.1.2013 rendered in  W.P.No.620 of 2013 has not been complied with.

Respondents have not complied with the order in its letter and spirit intentionally. Accordingly, the respondents have committed contempt of Court, as defined under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971.

Operative part of the order, noted above, reads as under:

" From the submissions, it is found that although policy of the Railways apparent from the Circular No. 03/2012 dated 12/13.1.2012 available on record as part of Annexure No. 15, permits consideration of the petitioner's application for transfer of the license in his name as legal heir of the original licensee and its further renewal, orders have not been passed in his favour because of the alleged dues of Rs. 88,600/-. In all fairness, the respondents should have disclosed this fact to the petitioner permitting him to deposit the said amount for allowing the transfer of vending licence in his name and its subsequent renewal. That was apparently not done.

However, learned counsel for the petitioner has expressed willingness on the part of the petitioner to deposit the said dues on an understanding that once the dues are deposited, his application shall be favourably considered without any delay.

This writ petition is accordingly disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to deposit the dues of Rs. 88,600/- with the concerned authority and upon such deposit the respondents shall consider and decide the application of the petitioner in light of the policy, evident from the Circular No. 03/2012, noticed above, at an early date, preferably within two months from the date of deposit of the requisite amount by the petitioner."

At this stage, issue notice to the respondent nos.3 to 5 to show-cause as to why they be not proceeded against for committing contempt of Court, for 08.7.2013.

The respondents are directed to furnish explanation as to under what circumstances the order passed by this court has not been complied with, and why contempt proceedings be not initiated.

At this stage, Sri Lalit Shukla, Learned Government Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent nos.3 to 5.

Copy of the petition has been given to him in the court, who has received the same on behalf of the respondent nos.3 to 5.

List on 08.7.2013

Order Date :- 23.5.2013

A.Nigam