Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

KAMRAN AHMADversusSRI SATYENDRA KUMAR, DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND 5 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The Court held that no contempt had occurred and therefore disposed of the contempt application.

Summary

The High Court disposed a civil contempt application filed by Kamran Ahmad against the District Magistrate and others. The application arose from a prior writ petition (Writ‑C No. 26542 of 2025) in which the Court had ordered that no demolition of the petitioners' constructions could occur except in accordance with the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The applicant conceded that no demolition had taken place and that a notice from the Varanasi Development Authority dated 4 May 2026 required a reply. The Court directed the applicant to file a reply within one week, attach a certified copy of the order, and directed the authority to take a final decision within two weeks. Finding no breach of the earlier order, the Court disposed of the contempt application.

Issues considered

  • Whether the applicant is in contempt of the earlier writ order for failing to comply with the directive against demolition
  • Whether the applicant must file a reply to the Varanasi Development Authority notice as per the court's direction

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • contempt
  • writ of mandamus
  • land acquisition
  • demolition
  • compliance
  • Varanasi Development Authority
  • order disposal

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
             CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1239 of 2026

Kamran Ahmad
                                                                   .....Applicant(s)
                                      Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Akanksha                  Srivastava,         Quazi
                                Mohammad                   Akaram,         Ziauddin
                                Farooqui
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :

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

1. The writ Court in Writ-C No. 26542 of 2025 on 8.9.2025 had passed
the following order;

     "1. Heard Ms. Ghazala Bano Quadri, learned counsel for the petitioners,
     Shri Vineet Sankalp, learned counsel for respondent No. 5 and Shri Rajiv
     Gupta, learned counsel for the State-respondents.

     2. The petitioners have prayed for a writ of mandamus restraining the
     respondents from demolishing their constructions or forcing them to sign
     any agreement for parting with their property without following the
     procedure prescribed under the Right to Fair Compensation and
     Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act,
     2013.

     3. Learned standing counsel has placed on record the instructions received
     from Executive Engineer, Provincial Division, Public Work Department,
     Varanasi, wherein, the stand taken is that certain land is required for
     widening and beautification of the road but the land owners have not
     given consent for sale/purchase of their land. The respondents would,
     therefore, follow the procedure prescribed under the Right to Fair
     Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
     Resettlement Act, 2013. It is also stated that at present, no demolition or
     dispossession is being undertaken.
                                                                                                           CAPL No. 1239 of 2026
                                                                           2


                                              4. In view of the aforesaid stand, the writ petition is disposed of by
                                              providing that the respondents would not demolish any construction or
                                              dispossess the petitioners except in accordance with law."

                                    2. Learned counsel for applicant fairly conceded the fact that no
                                    demolition has been carried out by the State authorities and a notice has
                                    been by Varanasi Development Authority on 4.5.2026.

                                    3. In view of the said fact, applicant is directed to file reply to the notice
                                    sent by Varanasi Development Authority within one week from today. In
                                    case, the said reply is filed by applicant alongwith a certified copy of this
                                    order within one week, the authority concerned shall proceed with the
                                    same and take a final call on the said reply, in accordance with law,
                                    within next two weeks.

                                    4. Contempt application stands disposed of.



                                                                                              (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.)
                                    May 6, 2026
                                    Shekhar




Digitally signed by :-
SHASHI SHEKHAR PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.