Allahabad High Court
Krishna Pal Singh vs Shri Sanjay Singhal Additional ... on 9 June, 2021
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 36
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1616 of 2021
Applicant :- Krishna Pal Singh
Opposite Party :- Shri Sanjay Singhal Additional Director General Of Police
Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Tiwari
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant through video conferencing.
The applicant is before this Court for a direction to initiate contempt proceeding against the opposite parties for wilful disobedience of the order dated 18.12.2020 passed in Writ Petition No.12973 of 2020 (Krishna Pal Singh v. State of U.P. & Ors.), which for ready reference is quoted as under:-
"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
At the very outset, learned counsel for petitioner has drawn attention of this Court towards an order dated 3.12.2020 passed in Writ A No. 10972 of 2020 (Paveen Kumar Solanki Vs State of UP and 4 others), by submitting that the present matter being identical with Praveen Kumar Solanki (supra), therefore, has prayed for the same relief. The order dated 3.12.2020 is as under:
"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
An order of transfer has been passed on 05.12.2019, which is being given effect to by passing relieving orders dated 09.06.2020.
Learned counsel for the parties do not dispute that facts of the present petition are identical to one occurring in Service Single No.10584 of 2017, which has been disposed of on 12.5.2017. The order dated 12.5.2017 is extracted herein below:-
"Heard learned Counsel for petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel.
Petitioners have challenged the impugned relieving order dated 23.04.2017 passed by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Hardoi (opposite party no.4) in pursuance to the transfer order passed on 09.07.2014,
It has been submitted by learned Counsel for petitioners that petitioners were transferred in the years 2014 and 2015 and now after lapse of 2-3 years, the aforesaid impugned relieving order has been passed by opposite party no.4.
Learned Standing Counsel, on the basis of the instructions, has admitted that definitely, the impugned reliving order has been passed too late and, therefore, fresh orders will be passed with respect to the petitioners and other persons who have not join their services in pursuance to the transfer order passed in the years 2014 and 2015.
Admittedly, there is a considerable long delay in passing the impugned and no cogent and justifiable reasons have been given for not acting upon the transfer order immediately when they were passed. Therefore, the impugned order passed in respect of petitioners is legally not sustainable and the same is hereby quashed.
It is open for the opposite parties to transfer the petitioners, if exigency of service so requires, in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition is disposed of finally."
Since the issue involved in the present matter is identical, the present writ petition is also disposed of on the same terms.
The concerned Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of computerized copy of this order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall act accordingly without waiting for submission of the certified copy of this order"
The Court has occasion to peruse the order dated 3.12.2020 passed in Writ A No. 10972 of 2020 (Paveen Kumar Solanki Vs State of UP and 4 others), which has been produced before the Court and finds that the issue raised in this petition is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment.
Accordingly, the present writ petition is also disposed of in terms of the judgement passed in Writ A No. 10972 of 2020 (Paveen Kumar Solanki Vs State of UP and 4 others)."
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 three weeks from the date of production of a 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 two weeks 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.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 9.6.2021
SP/
