Ikrar Ahmad vs Vinod Kumar Verma, Settlement ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 24976 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:178308
 
Court No. - 9
 

 
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 6141 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Ikrar Ahmad
 
Opposite Party :- Vinod Kumar Verma, Settlement Officer Cosolidation
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Umesh Vats
 

 
Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

The writ Court, on 31.05.2023 in Writ-B No.1939 of 2023, while granting interim order had passed the following order:-

"1. Heard Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that appeal filed by the contesting respondents was not maintainable even then the appellate court has entertained the appeal. He next submitted that in view of the pendency of the appeal the proceeding under Section 9-A (2) of U.P.C.H. act has been held up.

3. Matter requires consideration.

4. Issue notice to respondent Nos.2 to 5 returnable at an early date.

5. Steps be taken within two weeks.

6. Respondent Nos.6 to 43 are stated to be proforma respondents, as such notice to respondent Nos.6 to 43 are dispensed with.

7. Respondent Nos.2 to 5 shall file counter affidavit within six weeks.

7. Petitioner will file rejoinder affidavit within two weeks thereafter.

8. List on 27th September, 2023.

9.Until further orders of this Court, further proceeding of appeal No.2379 of 2022-23 pending before respondent No.1 Settlement Officer Consolidation shall remain stayed."

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the order passed by the Consolidation Officer rejecting the application filed by the defendants in the proceedings was challenged before the Settlement Officer, Consolidation by the defendants. The Settlement Officer, Consolidation had summoned the file of the Consolidation Officer.

The applicant, before this Court, had challenged the entire proceedings pending before the Settlement Officer, Consolidation by filing the writ petition wherein the proceedings before the Settlement Officer, Consolidation were stayed.

Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the file is still being retained by the Settlement Officer, Consolidation and it is not being returned to the Court of Consolidation Officer.

This Court, after hearing the counsel for the applicant, finds that no case for contempt is made out as Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 is very clear, which is as under:-

"Section 2(b)- "civil contempt" means wilful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a court or wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court."

From the perusal of the order passed by the writ Court on 31.05.2023, it is clear that the proceedings of Appeal No.2379 of 2022-23 is pending before the Settlement Officer, Consolidation were stayed by the writ Court and no further direction has been given.

No case for contempt is made out.

Contempt application is misconceived and the same stands dismissed.

However, it is open for the applicant to move a modification application, if so advised, before the appropriate Court.

Order Date :- 15.9.2023

SK Goswami