Allahabad High Court
Vikram Singh vs Sanjeev Mittal The Chairman Board ... on 24 January, 2023
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Subhash Vidyarthi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Court No. - 1
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 26 of 2023
Appellant :- Vikram Singh
Respondent :- Sanjeev Mittal The Chairman Board Of Revenue U.P. Lko. And Others
Counsel for Appellant :- S.P. Singh Somvanshi
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
(1) This intra Court appeal under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 has been filed by the appellant, Vikram Singh, challenging the judgment and order dated 13.01.2023 passed by Hon'ble Single Judge in Contempt Application (Civil) No. 3000 of 2022 : Vikram Singh Vs. Sanjeev Mittar and others, so far as it directs the appellant to pay a cost of Rs.25,000/-, which shall be deposited by the applicant within a period of two weeks from today with the Senior Registrar of this Court, failing which the Senior Registrar shall take appropriate steps for recovery of the same as arrears of land revenue expeditiously and shall place a report on the record of this Court.
(2) Heard Shri S.P. Singh Somvanshi, learned Counsel for the appellant, Shri Amitabh Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State/respondent no.4 and perused the impugned judgment as well as material brought on record.
(3) Brief facts of the case are that appellant preferred a writ petition, bearing Writ-A No. 5624 of 2022, before this Court. Hon'ble Single Judge disposed of the aforesaid writ petition by means of order 02.09.2022, directing the Commissioner, Prayagraj Division, Prayagraj to consider and decide the representation of the writ petitioner/appellant dated 24.08.2022 within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order in accordance with law by passing speaking and reasoned order and communicate the same to the writ petitioner/appellant as well. In compliance of the aforesaid order dated 02.09.2022, representation preferred by the appellant was disposed of by means of order dated 13.10.2022, a copy of which was also annexed as Annexture No.12 to the aforesaid contempt application.
(4) It appears that appellant has preferred Contempt Application (Civil) No. 3000 of 20022 alleging non-compliance of the order dated 02.09.2022 passed in Writ-A No. 5624 of 2022 on the ground that the representation of the appellant has been disposed of without considering the merit of the case and some judgment passed by this Court.
(5) It transpires from the impugned judgment that Hon'ble Single Judge has gone through the judgment and order dated 02.09.2022 passed by the Writ Court and also appreciated the aforesaid contention of the appellant that representation was disposed of without considering the merit of the case. Hon'ble Single Judge found that even the writ Court has not examined the merit of the case and it is only on the request of learned Counsel for the applicant, the writ petition was disposed of with the direction for disposal of the representation, therefore, once the representation has been disposed of in compliance of the order passed by the learned Writ Court, the order stands complied with and no contempt is made out. Hon'ble Single Judge also found that the aforesaid contempt application was nothing but an abuse of process of law and wastage of precious time of the Court, hence Hon'ble Single dismissed the aforesaid contempt application with a cost of Rs.25,000/- by means of the order 13.01.2013, which is impugned in the instant appeal.
(6) Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has not challenged the part of the impugned order passed by Hon'ble Single Judge by which the contempt application was dismissed, however, he prays that the second part of the impugned judgment so far as it directs the appellant to pay cost of Rs.25,000/- may be set-aside as the appellant has no intention to abuse the process of law or waste the precious time of the Court as he himself had annexed the copy of the order dated 13.10.2022 by which his representation in compliance of the order of the writ Court has been decided as Annexure No. 12 with the aforesaid contempt application.
(7) Considering the facts in its entirety, we do no find any illegality or perversity in the impugned order passed by Hon'ble Single Judge, dismissing the contempt application.
(8) However, taking into consideration that the appellant is a petty Class-III Government servant, ends of justice would be secured by reducing the cost from Rs.25,000/- to Rs.5000/-, which shall be paid by the appellant within a month in the account of Awadh Bar Association, High Court, Lucknow, failing which the Senior Registrar of this Court shall take appropriate steps for recovery of the same as arrears of land revenue expeditiously and shall place a report on the record of this Court.
(9) It is clarified that no adverse inference shall be drawn against the appellant by the departmental authorities on account of imposing of cost.
(10) The special appeal is allowed in part with the aforesaid modification in the impugned judgment passed by Hon'ble Single Judge.
.
(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 24.1.2023
Ajit/-
