Smt. Chakrawarti Devi vs Sri. Indrabhan Tiwari, S.D.M.
2019 Latest Caselaw 6331 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 10
 

 
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4814 of 2019
 

 
Applicant :- Smt. Chakrawarti Devi
 
Opposite Party :- Sri. Indrabhan Tiwari, S.D.M.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Satyam Kumar Jaiswal,Dhiraj Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

As it has been alleged the opposite party has willfully disobeyed the order dated 6.8.2018 passed by this Court in Writ C No. 26434 of 2018(Chakrawati Devi Vs. State of U.P. and others) whereby the Writ Court has proceeded to pass the following order.

"Learned counsel for the petitioner may implead the gaon sabha and serve a copy of this writ petition on the counsel during the course of the day.

The sole prayer of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Case No. T201602323073744 of 2016 (Smt. Chakrabvati Devi vs. Smt. Sunita Devi and Others) under Section 134 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, be expeditiously decided within a stipulated period of time.

It is, therefore, directed that the Sub-divisional Magistrate, Tehsil- Bara, District- Allahabad shall decide the Case No. T201602323073744 of 2016 within a period of ten months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, provided there is no other legal impediment.

The writ petition is disposed of."

Along with present contempt application, copy of the order-sheet of the aforementioned case is also appended as Annexure No. 5. Most surprisingly, the Court has occasion to peruse the said order-sheet and finds that since 2018, following dates were fixed in the case in question i.e. 15.1.18, 30.1.18, 15.2.18, 8.3.18, 26.3.18, 9.4.18, 24.4.18, 21.5.18, 29.5.18, 6.6.18, 20.7.18, 27.7.18, 13.8.18, 5.9.18, 11.9.18, 19.9.18, 26.9.18, 5.10.18, 31.10.18, 30.11.18, 21.12.18, 16.1.19, 13.2.19, 6.3.19, 13.3.19, 15.3.19, 18.3.19, 25.3.19, 29.3.19, 3.4.19, 5.4.19, 8.4.19, 10.4.19, 12.4.19, 15.4.19, 18.4.19, 20.4.19, 22.4.19, 24.4.19, 26.4.19, 29.4.19, 1.5.19, 3.5.19, 6.5.19, 8.5.19, 10.5.19, 31.5.19, 3.6.19. Even not a single date, the Advocates have appeared in the proceeding and on most of the dates, the Advocates were abstaining from judicial work.

In the facts and circumstances, the Court is of the considered opinion that the Presiding Officer must proceed in the aforementioned case and decide the same ex-parte, in case, there is no assistance extended by the applicant within a reasonable time in compliance of the Writ Court's order. Even if, there is any interference in the judicial proceedings, the Presiding Officer may call for police protection.

With the aforesaid observations, the present contempt application stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 1.8.2019

A.K.Srivastava