Radhey Lal vs Devendra Pal Sengar Tehsildar ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 6241 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 16
 

 
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4918 of 2017
 

 
Applicant :- Radhey Lal
 
Opposite Party :- Devendra Pal Sengar Tehsildar (Judicial) Teh.& Distt Mathura
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Mahesh Kumar Mishra
 

 
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

Heard Sri Mahesh Kumar Kuntal learned counsel for the applicant.

It is alleged that the order passed by writ court dated 23.9.2016 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 46019 of 2016 has not been complied with, despite service of it. Order dated 23.9.2016 reads as Under:-

"Heard Sri Mahesh Kumar Kuntal, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for the State-respondents and Sri A.K. Rai holding brief of Sri Ashish Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the Gaon Sabha.

In substance, the petitioner appears to be aggrieved by non-removal of the encroachment, from the Gaon Sabha land being Arazi No. 2629 recorded as Banjar/public utility land situated in Village Bad, Tehsil and District Mathura, made by respondent nos. 4 to 9.

After the commencement of Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 (in short 'the Code') and enforcement of Uttar Pradesh Revenue Rules, 2006 (in short 'the Rules'), the remedy of the petitioner is to approach the Assistant Collector of the concerned Tehsil under section 67 of the Code read with Rule 67 of the Rules.

In case such approach is made by way of filing an application, along with certified copy of the order of this Court, the Assistant Collector shall do the needful, expeditiously keeping in mind the law laid down by this Court in the case of Bhole Nath and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Others (2016 (7) ADJ 430), provided there is no legal impediment.

With the aforesaid observations / directions, this writ petition is disposed of".

It is  contended that order of the writ court has been served upon the opposite party by registered speed post on11.11.2016.

In  the facts  and circumstances of the case, as has been brought on record, prima-facie case of disobedience of order of writ court is made out. However,  one more indulgence is allowed to the opposite party to ensure compliance of the order passed by the writ Court.

Office is directed to send a copy of this petition to the opposite  party concerned alongwith a copy of this order. It shall keep record of the same. Process fee for the purpose be supplied by the petitioner within a week.

Considering the above, this contempt petition is disposed of with a direction upon the opposite party to comply with the directions issued by the writ court within a period of 2 months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order.  Liberty is reserved to the applicant to approach this Court again, in case the order of writ court is still not complied with.

It goes without saying that  before taking any action in the matter, the person likely to be affected will be afforded an opportunity of hearing.

Order Date :- 3.11.2017

n.u.