ATEEQ AHMAD KHANversusSRI. SATYENDRA KUMAR, DISTRICT MAGISTRATE VARANASI AND 5 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
           CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1062 of 2026

Ateeq Ahmad Khan
                                                                     .....Applicant(s)
                                        Versus

Sri. Satyendra Kumar, District Magistrate Varanasi
And 5 Others                                                              .....Opposite
                                                                                Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Quazi Mohammad Akaram, Shoar
                                Mohammad Khan, Ziauddin Farooqui
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :

Court No. - 9
                HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anoop
Trivedi, learned Additional Advocate General for the State as
well as Sri Bipin Bihari Pandey, learned Chief Standing Counsel
appearing for Nagar Nigam, Varanasi.

2. The applicant, before this Court along with other persons, had
filed Writ-C No.16448 of 2025 which was disposed of on
21.05.2025 in terms of the decision rendered in case of
Shahnawaz Khan vs. State of U.P. and others, Writ-C
No.12319 of 2025, and following order was passed:-

     "1. Heard Sri Q.M. Akaram, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri
     Rajiv Gupta, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-
     respondents.
     2. The petitioners have prayed for quashing of a Government Order dated
     31.03.2025 by which certain amount was sanctioned by the State
     Government for widening and beautification of six roads in District
     Varanasi. The case of the petitioners is that the petitioner no. 2 is owner of
     House No. CK43/113-A, Govindpura, Kalan, Dalmandi, Varanasi,
     petitioners no. 3 and 4 claim to be owner of House No. CK43/114
     Dalmandi, Varanasi and petitioners no. 1 & 5 claim to be tenants of
     House Nos. CK39/74-76, Raja Katra, Dalmandi, Varanasi and CK43/121,
     Mohalla Govindpura Kalan, Dalmandi Road, District Varanasi. The case
                                                           CAPL No. 1062 of 2026
                              2


of the petitioners is that the respondents in pursuance of Government
Order dated 31.03.2025 are threatening to demolish their constructions
without acquiring their property/rights as per provisions of law.
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the parties that the controversy
involved herein is covered by order dated 20.5.2025 passed in Writ C No.
12319 of 2025 (Shahnawaz Khan vs. State of U.P. and Others).
4. The operative part of the said order is extracted below:-
"5. The District Magistrate, Varanasi has filed his affidavit on behalf of
the State-respondents. The stand taken therein is that the State-
Government is proposing to widen and strengthen Dal Mandi road. On
20.3.2025 a preliminary estimate was sent to the State Government for the
said purpose. The total estimated cost was Rs. 22059.46 lakhs.
Subsequently, a revised estimate was also submitted. The Public Works
Department made demarcation of the land/houses which would be affected
by widening under the proposed work. It is unequivocally stated in the
affidavit that the respondents would acquire title over the land/building
which would be affected by the proposed project on basis of mutual
consent or through acquisition under the provisions of the Act of 2013.
The relevant assertions contained in this regard in paragraphs 13, 14 and
15 are extracted below:-
13-That, the widening and strengthening of the road in question will be
completed after the settling the dispute amicably either by purchasing the
land in question as provisions of the government order No. 2/2015/215/??-
13-2015-20(48)/2011 dated 19.03.2015, with mutual consent/agreement or
as per the prescribed provisions under the Right to Fair Compensation
and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013. A true copy of the
government order dated 19/03/2015 is being filed herewith and marked as
Annexure No. 4 to the affidavit.
14-That widening and strengthening of the road in question would be
completed after providing the compensation under the provisions of the
government order (supra), and if the land owner does not give his consent,
then the provisions of the Act of 2013 would be applied.
15-That at present, there is no demolition drive going on adjacent of the
road side of the road in question for road widening, those land owners
come in purview in the alignment of the road widening and strengthening
                                                               CAPL No. 1062 of 2026
                                  3


    of the road in question they must be dealt with under the due process of
    law and no one have deprive their legal rights.
    6. Sri M.C. Chaturvedi, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by
    Sri Rajeev Singh, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State
    submits that the respondents would not disturb the possession of the
    petitioner nor demolish his constructions unless title over the same is
    acquired through voluntary transfer or by compulsory acquisition or any
    other mode recognized under law.
    7. Keeping in mind the aforesaid stand, the writ petition stands disposed of
    in terms of the same."
    5. Having regard to the aforesaid, we dispose of the instant petition in
    same terms."


3. In the said writ petition, the State of U.P. through Principal
Secretary, Public Works Department, Executive Engineer,
Public Works Department, Varanasi, Chairman, Public Works
Department, Varanasi and District Magistrate, Varanasi were
arrayed as respondents.

4. It appears from paragraph 11 of the affidavit to the contempt
application that the Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam,
Varanasi had issued a notice on 31.01.2026 in exercise of power
under Section 331(1)(2) of Uttar Pradesh Municipal Corporation
Act, 1959. The said notice remained unattended, and a
demolition was carried out by the Nagar Nigam on 09.02.2026
on the ground that the house in question was in a dilapidated
condition.

5. In the affidavit filed on behalf of opposite party no.4 i.e.
Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Varanasi, it has been
stated that they were not the party in the writ petition filed by the
applicant, nor they were aware of the said fact. Notice was
issued on 31.01.2026, against which, no writ petition was filed
by the applicant.

6. In view of the said fact, this Court finds that as there is no
order of the writ Court against the Municipal Commissioner,
                                                                                      CAPL No. 1062 of 2026
                                                                4


                                    Varanasi, and the demolition has been carried out by the Nagar
                                    Nigam, Varanasi, no case for contempt is made out.

                                    7. Contempt application is misconceived and the same stands
                                    dismissed.

                                    8. Counsel for the applicant states that till date the applicant has
                                    not received any compensation for the land in question over
                                    which the house was standing, which has been demolished by
                                    Nagar Nigam.

                                    9. Sri Anoop Trivedi, learned Additional Advocate General
                                    appearing for the State submits that the applicant has not sought
                                    any compensation and the land is still lying vacant and the
                                    demolition has been carried out by the Nagar Nigam as the
                                    property in question was in dilapidated condition.


                                                                              (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.)
                                    May 6, 2026
                                    SK Goswami




Digitally signed by :-
SHIVAKANT GOSWAMI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad