M/S Shanti Construction Company vs Sanjay Khatri
2021 Latest Caselaw 9222 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 4
 

 
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2381 of 2021
 

 
Applicant :- M/S Shanti Construction Company
 
Opposite Party :- Sanjay Khatri
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Pawnesh Tiwari
 

 
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

The applicant has preferred the present contempt application for non-compliance of the final judgment and order dated 26.11.2020 passed in Writ - C No. 16878 of 2020. The order dated 26.11.2020 is reproduced herein below:-

"1. Heard Sri A.P. Paul, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri P.K. Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for respondents.

2. By this writ petition, a challenge has been made to the order dated 22/23.11.2019 with a prayer to refund the amount of Rs. 4,73,000/- deposited towards earnest money.

3. It is a case where pursuant to advertisement issued by respondents, petitioner remained successful for a mining area. Respondents issued a Letter of Intent on 27.07.2018 in favour of petitioner, however mining operation could not have been undertaken for want of no objection certificate from Forest Department. Petitioner made a representation on 13.08.2018 to request for exemption from payment as no objection certificate could not be obtained by the respondents from the Forest Department but instead of taking action on it, Letter of Intent was cancelled by the order dated 22/23.11.2019 without providing an opportunity of hearing.

4. The direction to deposit amount could not have been given rather petitioner should have been exempted till no objection certificate is obtained. It is not in dispute that Forest Department refused no objection certificate as the mining area was within 100 meters from forest.

5. Learned Standing Counsel was asked as to why the auction of area was made when it is within 100 meters from the forest and that too without seeking no objection certificate from Forest Department. It could not be explained. It is also as to why decision on representation sent by the petitioner was not taken. The petitioner was not even offered opportunity of hearing before passing the impugned order. The order was thus passed in violation of principle of natural justice.

6. In view of the above, impugned order dated 22/23.11.2019 is set aside in the facts and circumstances of the case with a direction to respondents to refund the amount of earnest money to the petitioner.

7. The writ petition is allowed with the aforesaid."

Today when the matter was taken up, an affidavit of compliance has been filed by the opposite party. It is stated in the said affidavit of compliance that the order passed by the writ court has been complied with in its letter and spirit. This fact has also been admitted by learned counsel for the applicant. In view of the same, no further order is required to be passed.

The contempt application is dismissed as having become infructuous.

Order Date :- 2.8.2021

nd