Allahabad High Court
ASHWANI KUMAR SHUKLA AND 7 OTHERSversusMR. DEEPAK KUMAR ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY FINANCE AUDIT SECTION-1 GOVERNMENT OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- VIKAS BUDHWAR
Holding
The Court held that the respondent's delay was unreasonable but, having filed an affidavit indicating that the representation was decided on 10‑09‑2026, the contempt application was consigned to the record pending further challenge.
Summary
The petitioners, former auditors appointed in 1995 and superannuated between 2024 and 2026, claimed they were not receiving the statutory grade pay of Rs. 5,400 and filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the Additional Chief Secretary, Finance Audit Section‑1, to decide their claim. The High Court, on 25 February 2026, ordered the respondent to consider the representation within two weeks and to render a decision within two months of receiving the certified copy. The petitioners later filed a contempt application alleging the respondent’s failure to comply with that order. The Court repeatedly directed the respondent to file an affidavit of compliance and rejected a six‑week extension sought by the respondent as unreasonable. On 10 September 2026 the respondent filed an affidavit stating that the representation had been decided, and the Court consigned the contempt application to the record, leaving it open for further challenge by the petitioners.
Issues considered
- Whether the respondent is in contempt for not complying with the order dated 25‑02‑2026 within the prescribed time.
- Whether a six‑week extension sought by the respondent is a reasonable time for compliance.
- Whether filing an affidavit of compliance suffices to discharge the alleged contempt.
Subjects
- contempt of court
- non‑compliance of judicial order
- grade pay
- auditor superannuation
- writ petition
- High Court of Allahabad
- compliance affidavit
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4605 of 2026
Ashwani Kumar Shukla And 7 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
Mr. Deepak Kumar Additional Chief Secretary
Finance Audit Section-1 Government Of U.P. .....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Lavlesh Kumar Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :
Court No. - 53
HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J.
1. Affidavit of compliance filed by the opposite party is taken on record.
2. This Court on 07.08.2026 proceeded to pass the following orders:
"1. The present contempt petition has been preferred alleging non-compliance of the
order dated 25.02.2026 passed in Writ A No.2820 of 2026, the order whereof is
quoted hereinunder:
"1. Heard Sri Lavlesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri
Gaurav Singh, learned Standing Counsel, who appears for State-respondents.
2. The case of the writ petitioners is that they are appointed on the post of Auditor in
the year 1995 and they superannuated in the year 2024, 2025 and 2026, however, they
are not being paid the grade pay of Rs. 5400/- and based upon the same applying the
principles of last pay drawn, they are
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 petitioners needs
adjudication at the first instance by the first respondent, Additional Chief Secretary
Finance Audit Section-1, Government of U.P, Lucknow.
5. To such a submission, learned counsel for the petitioners 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 petitioners to prefer a
comprehensive representation along with the self-attested copy of the writ petition
before the first respondent, who shall on the receipt of the same within a period of two
weeks, proceed to decide the claim of the petitioners 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 first respondent is of the opinion that the matter is to be decided by
CAPL No. 4605 of 2026
2
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.
8. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed off."
2. This Court on 22.07.2026 proceeded to pass the following orders:
"1. Let a copy of the contempt application be served upon Sri Brijesh Kumar, learned
Standing Counsel during the course of the day who shall seek instruction before the
next date.
2. Put up this case on 04.08.2026, as fresh."
3. Sri Brijesh Kumar, learned Standing Counsel had produced a letter dated
31.07.2026 and 04.08.2026 mentioning therein that though the instructions has called
by the Court, the said aspect was communicated to the opposite party but he has not
received instructions.
4. Prima facie, a case for contempt is made out.
5. Issue notice to opposite party. 6. List this case on 07.09.2026 at 2.00 PM in the
additional cause list, on the said date, an affidavit of compliance be filed and in case,
the same is not filed then the Court would be constrained to summon the opposite
party."
3. Thereafter on 07.09.2026 following orders have been passed:
"1. This Court on 07.08.2026, required the opposite party to file affidavit of
compliance.
2. Today, instructions have been produced according to which, the comments of
Director has been received. However, six weeks' time is sought.
3. In the opinion of the Court, six weeks' time is not a reasonable time particularly
when the opposite party is in contempt.
4. Put up this case on 18.09.2026 in the daily cause list under the same caption.
5. Copy of instructions filed today is taken on record and marked as Appendix-Z."
4. Today a compliance affidavit has been filed on behalf of the opposite
party, according to which, the representation has been decided on
10.09.2026.
5. Accordingly, the contempt application stands consigned to record,
leaving it open for the applicant to question the said order before appropriate
forum in accordance with law.
September 18, 2026
Ashu
(Vikas Budhwar,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…