Meraj Ahmad vs Shri Amrit Abhijat, Addl. Chief ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 11058 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 8
 

 
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 959 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Meraj Ahmad
 
Opposite Party :- Shri Amrit Abhijat, Addl. Chief Secy. / Prin. Secy. Urban Development Govt. Of U.P. Lko. And Others
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Karm Veer Yadav
 

 
Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

1. Supplementary affidavit filed today in Court by the learned counsel for the applicant be kept on record.

2. Heard.

3. Instant contempt application has been filed alleging non compliance of an interim order of this Court dated 16.11.2022 passed in Writ-C No. 7841 of 2022 Inre; Pradeep Kumar Yadav and Ors Vs. State of U.P and Ors. In the writ petition, under challenge was a final notification dated 27.09.2022 whereby the village in question namely Bibipur had been included for the purpose of delimitation in the municipal area of Nagar Panchayat- Bhadarsa District- Ayodhya and thereafter final notification has also been issued on 13.10.2022.

4. Upon a challenge being raised, the writ Court vide interim order dated 16.11.2022 had extended the benefit of the judgment rendered in Writ-C No. 2679 of 2022 decided on 27.09.2022 to the applicant. Incidentally, the judgment of Writ-C No. 26793 of 2022 has been annexed as annexure 2 to the contempt application.

5. Perusal of the aforesaid judgment would indicate that there were three notification under challenge before the writ Court at Allahabad namely notification dated 10.08.2022, 12.12.2022 & 22.07.2022. The writ Court vide judgment and order dated 27.09.2022 quashed the notification dated 10.08.2022 but upon finding that no challenge had been raised to the notification dated 12.12.2022 and 22.07.2022 recorded that the challenge to those notifications have failed.

6. The argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that as the writ challenging notification filed at Allahabad had been allowed vide judgment and order dated 27.09.2022 and writ Court while passing the interim order dated 16.11.2022 in the case of the applicant has granted the benefit of the judgment and order dated 27.09.2022 as such, it would be deemed that the notification dated 16.07.2022 and 13.10.2022 (as challenged in the petitioner's petition) have been quashed by the writ Court by means of an interim order considering the order passed at Allahabad.

7. The said argument does not inspire much confidence with this Court inasmuch as, as already indicated above the writ Court at Allahabad vide judgment and order dated 27.09.2022 had quashed the notification dated 10.08.2022 but specifically recorded that challenge to notification dated 12.12.2022 and 22.07.2022 have failed. It is not that the date of notification of the applicant is the same as that at Allahabad inasmuch as the date of notification in the case of the applicant are at variance with the notifications that were challenged at Allahabad and of which the challenge to two notifications have failed and one notification had succeeded. Thus, keeping in view the aforesaid it is apparent that the interim order of the writ Court dated 16.11.2022, the contempt of which is being alleged by the applicant does not make out clear case of deliberate and willful disobedience if any considering the aforesaid incongruities as have been indicated above.

8. Considering the aforesaid, no case for contempt is made out. However, the applicant would be at liberty of filing of an appropriate application for modification/ clarification of the interim order dated 16.11.2022.

9. Contempt application is rejected with liberty as aforesaid.

Order Date :- 13.4.2023

Pachhere/-