Allahabad High Court
DR HARSHVARDHAN SHARMAversusDR NARAYAN DAS
- Decided
- Bench
- VIKAS BUDHWAR
Holding
The court held that substantial compliance with the earlier order existed, and therefore the contempt application was consigned to the record.
Summary
Dr Harshvardhan Sharma filed a contempt application alleging that Dr Narayan Das willfully defied the High Court's order dated 26‑11‑2025 in Writ‑A No. 17841, which required the petitioner to file a representation before the Director of Ayurveda Department by 12‑12‑2025 and for the department to decide the claim within two months. The court later received instructions dated 03‑09‑2026 showing that the representation had been decided. Observing that substantial compliance with the original order had been achieved, the court consigned the contempt application to the record, leaving the applicant free to raise any further question in appropriate proceedings. No merits of the original writ petition were decided in the contempt proceeding.
Issues considered
- Whether the respondent willfully defied the order dated 26‑11‑2025 directing filing of representation and decision within two months.
- Whether substantial compliance with the order negates the finding of contempt.
Subjects
- contempt of court
- willful defiance
- order compliance
- substantial compliance
- writ petition
- representation
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4173 of 2026
Dr Harshvardhan Sharma
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
Dr Narayan Das
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jitdendra Kumar Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :
Court No. - 53
HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J.
1. The present contempt application has been preferred alleging willful
defiance of the order dated 26.11.2025 passed in Writ-A No. 17841 of 2025,
order whereof is quoted hereinunder.-
"1. Heard Sri Jitdendra Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner
and Sri Vishal Singh, learned Standing Counsel, who appears for State-
respondents.
2. The case of the writ petitioner is that he was appointed on the post of
Medical Officer in erstwhile Uttranchal which was the part of State of
Uttar Pradesh and post re-organization, he opted for Uttar Pradesh and
during the period from 18.01.2009 to 13.05.2009 when he was attached,
he was not accorded any salary for the said period on the ground that the
writ petitioner has not worked. Conversely, the claim of the writ
petitioner is that he had already worked and he is entitled to salary.
3. Prayer in the present petition is for a direction to the respondents to
consider the claim.
4. Learned Standing Counsel submits that the claim of the writ petitioner
needs adjudication at the first instance by the second respondent,
Director of Ayurveda Department, Government of U.P. at Lucknow.
5. To such a submission, learned counsel for the petitioner has no
objection and he gracefully accepts the same.
6. Considering the submissions of the rival parties as well as stand taken
by them, the writ petition is being disposed off granting liberty to the writ
petitioner to prefer a comprehensive representation along with the self-
attested copy of the writ petition before the second respondent, who shall
on the receipt of the same by 12.12.2025, proceed to decide the claim of
the petitioner strictly in accordance with law within a period of two
months from the date of presentation of the certified copy of the order. In
case the second respondent is of the opinion that the matter is to be
decided by some other authorities then the papers shall be transmitted to
the same.
7. Needless to point out that the writ petition has been decided without
seeking any response from the respondents. Thus, passing of this order
may not be construed to an expression that this Court has gone into the
merits of the case.
CAPL No. 4173 of 2026
2
8. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed off."
2. Today, instructions have been produced annexing therewith the order
dated 03.09.2026 deciding the representation. A copy of the same be served
upon the learned counsel for the applicant.
3. Since there has been substantial compliance, the present contempt
application is consigned to record leaving it open to the applicant to
question the same before appropriate proceedings.
4. Instructions filed today are taken on record and marked as Appendix 'C'.
(Vikas Budhwar,J.)
September 8, 2026
Rajesh
Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…