Allahabad High Court
DILSHAD AHMAD KHANversusSHRI SATYENDRA KUMAR POSTED AS DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL
Holding
No case for contempt was made out; the contempt application was dismissed.
Summary
The applicant, Dilshad Ahmad Khan, filed a contempt application against a district magistrate and other officials, alleging non‑compliance with a notice issued under Section 331(1)(2) of the U.P. Nagar Nigam Adhiniyam, 1959. The respondent, represented by counsel for Nagar Nigam Varanasi, argued that the notice had not been responded to and that no demolition activity had been undertaken, contending that the municipal corporation was not a party to the earlier writ proceedings. The court examined whether the notice and the alleged non‑compliance amounted to contempt of court. It held that the mere existence of an unattended notice did not constitute contempt, especially as the municipal body was not a party to the writ. Consequently, the contempt application was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the failure to respond to a notice under Section 331(1)(2) of the U.P. Nagar Nigam Adhiniyam, 1959, amounts to contempt of court.
- Whether Nagar Nigam Varanasi, not being a party to the writ proceedings, can be held in contempt.
Legislation cited
- U.P. Nagar Nigam Adhiniyam, 1959 — s. 331(1), 331(2)
Subjects
- contempt of court
- municipal corporation
- notice under statutory provision
- jurisdiction
- writ proceedings
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1590 of 2026
Dilshad Ahmad Khan
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
Shri Satyendra Kumar Posted As District
Magistrate And 4 Others .....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohammad Khalid
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :
Court No. - 9
HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.
1. Personal affidavit of opposite party no. 1 has been filed today, which is
taken on record.
2. Applicant before this Court had filed Writ-C No. 39496 of 2025 which
was disposed of on 13.11.2025.
3. Contempt proceedings were initiated by the applicant against the State
officials as well as officials of Nagar Nigam.
4. Sri Bipin Bihari Pandey, learned counsel, has put in appearance on
behalf of Nagar Nigam Varanasi and states that a notice under Section
331 (1) (2) of U.P. Nagar Nigam Adhiniyam, 1959 has been issued
against the applicant which has not been responded till date. According to
him, no demolition activity has been carried out by the State authorities.
He further submits that Nagar Nigam Varanasi is not a party in writ
proceedings and contempt proceedings have been initiated against the
Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam Varanasi, while only a notice has
been issued by Nagar Nigam which has remained unattended till date.
5. No case for contempt is made out. Contempt application stands
dismissed.
(Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.)
May 6, 2026/Shekhar
Digitally signed by :-
SHASHI SHEKHAR PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…