Surendra vs Dr. Raj Shekhar, D.M.
2019 Latest Caselaw 5574 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 10
 

 
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4024 of 2019
 

 
Applicant :- Surendra
 
Opposite Party :- Dr. Raj Shekhar, D.M.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Gopal Das Srivastava
 

 
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

The applicant is before this Court for a direction to initiate contempt proceeding against the opposite parties for wilful disobedience of the order dated 31.01.2019 passed in Writ-C No.3530 of 2019 (Bharatram & Ors. v. U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. & Ors.), which for ready reference is quoted as under:-

"We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Pankaj Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the respondents.

The petitioners are aggrieved by the action of the Power Corporation, whereby they are installing the high tension towers near the residence of the petitioners. The material on the record would show that for redressal of their grievance, the petitioners have approached the District Magistrate, Basti where the matter is still pending.

The Sub Rule (3) of Rule 3 of the Works of Licensees Rule, 2006, provides that an objection can be decided by the District Magistrate and his order shall be subject to the revision by the appropriate Commission.

It is stated on behalf of petitioners that they have moved a representation before the District Magistrate. However, from perusal of the said objection, we are not satisfied that the proper application has been moved in terms of 2006 Rules.

Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we provide that if the petitioners move a fresh application before the District Magistrate within two weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order, the District Magistrate shall pass the order in terms of Sub (Rule) 3 of Rule 3 of 2006 Rules, expeditiously, preferably within two months from the date of communication of this order.

Needless to say that we have not expressed our view on the merits of the case. The District Magistrate shall pass an order in accordance with law."

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a certified copy of the aforesaid order was submitted for compliance before the opposite parties but the opposite parties have wilfully not complied with the order and, thus, have committed civil contempt liable for punishment under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

Prima facie a case of contempt has been made out. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, one more opportunity is afforded to the opposite parties to comply with the aforesaid order of the Court within two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

The applicant shall supply a duly stamped registered envelope addressed to the opposite parties and another self-addressed stamped envelope to the office within one week from today. The office shall send a copy of this order along with the self-addressed stamped envelope of the applicant with a copy of contempt application to the opposite parties within one week, thereafter and keep a record thereof. The opposite party shall comply with the directions of the writ Court and intimate the applicant of the order through the self-addressed envelop within a week, thereafter.

With the aforesaid observations, this application is disposed of at this stage with liberty to the applicant to move a fresh application, if the order is not complied with by the opposite parties within the stipulated time as aforementioned.

Order Date :- 8.7.2019

SP/