Allahabad High Court

BIJENDRA BAHADUR SINGHversusSRI RAJESH KUMAR VERMA, SDO

Decided: 22 September 2026
Bench: VIKAS BUDHWAR

Holding

The Court held that substantial compliance with the earlier order, coupled with the pendency of a civil suit, precludes a finding of contempt and therefore consigned the contempt application to the record.

Summary

The High Court of Allahabad entertained a contempt application filed by Bijendra Bahadur Singh alleging that the Sub‑Divisional Officer, Tehsil Chunar, had failed to comply with the order dated 19.04.2024 in PIL No. 83 of 2024 directing a spot inspection and demarcation of alleged road encroachments on Arazi 212M and 373M. The opposite party submitted an affidavit stating that a spot inspection had been conducted, revealing that the land in question was barren and being used as a village road, with no encroachment, and that a civil suit (Civil Suit No. 443 of 2023) concerning the same land was pending with a status‑quo order. The Court examined the affidavit, the pending civil suit, and the fact that the officer had been transferred, concluding that there was substantial compliance with the earlier order. Consequently, the Court consigned the contempt application to the record, leaving it open for future proceedings if necessary. The bail and appearance of the opposite party before the Chief Judicial Magistrate were also noted. The judgment thus dismissed the contempt proceedings on the basis of substantial compliance and pending litigation.

Issues considered

Whether the Sub‑Divisional Officer violated the order dated 19.04.2024 in PIL No. 83 of 2024 by failing to conduct a spot inspection and demarcation of the alleged encroached road.
Whether the existence of a pending civil suit and a status‑quo order amounts to substantial compliance with the court's directive.
Whether contempt proceedings should continue against the opposite party.

Subjects

contempt
public interest litigation
land encroachment
spot inspection
substantial compliance
civil suit
status quo
road encroachment

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 5090 of 2024

Bijendra Bahadur Singh
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
Sri Rajesh Kumar Verma, Sdo
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sunil Kumar Patel
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :

Court No. - 53
HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J.

1. The affidavit, filed on behalf of opposite party no. 1, is taken on record.

2. This Court on 19.08.2026 proceeded to pass the following orders:

"Order on Civil Misc. Impleadment Application No. 1 of 2026
1. Since there is no objection to the same by the learned Standing
Counsel, impleadment application stands allowed.
2. Accordingly, impleadment application is allowed.
3. Let necessary impleadment be carried out by learned counsel for
applicant, Shri Aneg Singh, Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil Chunar,
District Mirzapur as opposite party no.2, during the course of the day.
Order on Contempt Application (Civil) 4. The present contempt petition
has been preferred alleging non-compliance of the order dated
19.04.2024 passed in PIL No. 83 of 2024, the order whereof is quoted
hereinunder:
"1. Heard Shri Sunil Kumar Patel, learned counsel for the writ petitioner
and Shri Rajesh Kumar Tiwari, learned Additional Chief Standing
Counsel for respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3. Notice on behalf of respondent
no.4 has been accepted by Shri Pradeep Singh.
2. In view of the order, which is being proposed to be passed today,
notices are not being issued to the respondent Nos.5, 6 and 7.
3. Essentially the present PIL has been preferred for a direction to the
second respondent, District Magistrate, Mirzapur, District-Mirzapur and
the Sub-Divisional Officer, Tehsil Chunar, District-Mirzapur, third
respondent to take a necessary action for removal of the
encroachment/obstruction whereby they have encroached upon the public
road which is over Arazi No. 212M Rakba 0.0310 and Arazi No. 373
Rakba 2 Bigha and 18 Biswa which is recorded as Banjar in the village
CAPL No. 5090 of 2024
2

concerned.
4. This Court on 30.01.2024 sought instructions.
5. Pursuant thereto, orders were passed on 20.02.2024 and thereafter on
14.03.2024. After service of the copy of the instructions upon the learned
counsel for the writ petitioner, the learned counsel for the writ petitioner
has filed reply to the instructions dated 12.04.2024. A perusal of the
instructions under the signatures of Sub-Divisional Officer, Tehsil
Chunar, District-Mirzapur as received on 12.03.2024 would reveal that
in para 1 it is recited that Arazi No. 212M Rakba 0.719 hectares contains
six khatas para 2, it is asserted that Arazi No. 212M Rakba 0.719 hectare
situated in Gram Pauni Pargana Baghwat Tehsil Chunar, District
Mirzapur contains as may as six Khata. It is further asserted that in Arazi
No. 212M only 0.031 hectares is recorded as Banzar which is apparent
from Khata No. 265 and with respect of five other Khatas Rakba 0.688
hectares, it stands recorded in the name of various agriculturist/land
owners. Insofar as Arazi No. 373M Rakba 0.736 hectares situated at
Gram Pauni, Pargana Baghwat Tehsil Chunar, District Mirzapur with
regard to the fasli year in the Khatauni 1430-1435, 14 Khatas are
existing which stands recorded in the various land owners/agriculturist
and in Arazi No. 373 at present Banjar is not recorded, in para 5 of the
said instructions page 2, it is recited that Arazi No. 212M and Arazi No.
373M total Rakba 1455 hectares only 0.031 is recorded as Banzar and
over 0.065 hectares, road is existing which is in running condition. It is
also asserted that a civil suit filed before the Civil Judge (Junior
Division) in Civil Suit No. 443 of 2023 which is pending in which there is
an injunction order dated 08.07.2024.
6. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner has invited the attention
towards various documents contained in the reply to the instructions so
as to contend that without there being any proper demarcation and a
preparation of spot memo, it cannot be established that the pathway is
free from obstruction/encroachment. He submits that let a proper spot
inspection be done and a spot memo be done in the presence of the
villagers.
7. Shri Rajesh Kumar Tiwari, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel
submits that though the instructions do not contain any spot memo,
however, in the fitness of the matter and in order to preserve the land of
the State Government/Gaon Sabha, an inspection will be conducted by the
competent authority in the presence of the villagers and thereafter if
necessary proceedings will be initiated as per the statute.
8. At this stage, Shri Rajesh Kumar Tiwari, learned Additional Chief
Standing Counsel submits that with respect to the order dated 02.11.2023
passed in O.S. No. 443 of 2023 while disposing Application No. 8-Ga,
CAPL No. 5090 of 2024
3

directions has been issued for demarcation/spot inspection.
9. Considering the submissions of the rival parties as well as stand taken
by them, the writ petition is being disposed of requiring the writ petitioner
to approach the third respondent, Sub-Divisional Officer, Tehsil Chunar,
District-Mirzapur along with self attested copy of the writ petition, the
reply submitted to the instructions and the certified copy of the order
before the third respondent, Sub-Divisional Officer, Tehsil Chunar,
District-Mirzapur who shall thereafter proceed to take appropriate
decision regarding spot inspection and if necessary conduct proceedings
done as per the statute.
10. 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.
11. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed off."
5. This Court on 07.08.2024 proceeded to pass the following orders:
"Issue notice to the opposite party fixing 23.10.2024 to answer as to why
contempt proceedings should not be initiated against him for violation of
the order passed by this Court.
List on 23.10.2024."
6. There is an office report dated 22.10.2024 / 30.07.2026 which reads as
under: "In compliance of Hon'ble Court's order dt. 07/8/24 notice issued
to opp. party has been served through his counsel. The case is put up for
order."
7. Let a bailable warrant be issued against the opposite party no. 1
through Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur.
8. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur shall ensure presence of the
opposite party on the said date.
9. Issue notice to opposite party no. 2.
10. List on 23.09.2026 in the additional cause list."

3. The affidavit of the opposite party no. 1 which reads as under:

"10. That after passing the aforesaid order dated 19.08.2026 in the
present contempt application, the spot inspection as well as documentary
investigation was again conducted. After investigation, it was found that
there are 6 Battedar numbers in plot no. 212 of village Pauni Pargana
Bhagwat Tehsil Chunar District Mirzapur, which is 212 mi area 0.632
hectare. Cultivator Urmila Devi wifeof late Nandlal, Kaushal Kumar
Singh son of Sitaram, Girja son of Ganga, Chandshekhar son of late
Radheshyam, Parameshwar Singh son of Siddhnath, Bache Lal son of
Shyamlal, Munni Devi wife of late Jawahar, Rajendra Prasad Singh son
of late Jawahar, Ramchandra Singh and Vijay Kumar Singh sons of late
CAPL No. 5090 of 2024
4

Banwari and Ramsharwar Singh and Rameshwar Singh sons of
Siddhnath, plot no. 212 mi. area 0.0180 hectare. Cultivator Nandlal son
of Ramnath plot no. 212 mi area 0.0190 hectare. Babunandan and
Shivdas and Haridas sons of Bhagelu plot no. 212 mi area 0.0190 hectare
Ramchandra and Lallan and Lalman sons of Jholai and Sukhiya Devi
wife of Chotai plot no. 212 mi area 0.0380 hectare cultivator Sudama and
Rama and Kamla Prasad and Govind Lal sons of Ramdev and Mansha
Ram and Hansa and Kanta Prasad sons of Mahadev, plot no. 212 mi area
0.0310 hectare which is mentioned in barren category 5-3 (d) / other
cultivable barren land account. The said plot no. 212 mi, which is barren
land account, was found in the shape of a road on the spot, which is being
used by the villagers as a road.
11. That it is further submitted that plot No. 373 Mi area 0.5310 Hectare
which belongs to Urmila Devi wife of Late Nandlal, Kaushal Kumar
Singh son of Sitaram, Girja son of Ganga, Chandshekhar son of Late
Radheshyam, Parameshwar Singh and Ramsarwar Singh and Rameshwar
Singh sons of Siddhnath, Bache Lal son of Shyamlal, Munni Devi wife of
Late Jawahar, Rajendra Prasad Singh son of Late Jawahar, Ramchandra
Singh and Vijay Kumar Singh sons of Late Banwari Plot No.373bhi Area
0.0330 Hectare Gulab Patti Devi wife of Deenanath Singh, Plot. No.
373mi Area 0.0130 Hectare Fourth Ram son of Pakhandi Plot. No. 373mi
Area 0.0130 Hectare Kewala Devi wife of Sachchu, Jhagdu and Munna
sons of Sachchu, Plot. No. 373mi Area 0.0130 Hectare Nandlal son of
Ramnath, Plot. No. 373mi Area 0.0130 Hectare Pancham son of Tulsi,
Plot. No. 373mi Area 0.0130 Hectare Chhabinath and Ramkishun sons of
Bachau and Mallo Devi wife of Bachau, Plot. No. 373mi Area 0.0190
Hectare Babunandan and Shivdas and Haridas sons of Bhagelu, Plot.
No.373bh. area 0.0130ha. Kallo Devi wife of Baijnath and Bechan son
Baijnath and Arazi No. 373 Mi. Area 0.0170 Hectare Moose son of
Pannar, Arazi No. 373m. Area 0.0190 hectare Ramchandra and Lallan
and Lalman Sons Jholai and Sukhiya Devi wife of Chotai, Plot No. 373
Mr. Area 0.0130 hectare Ramdulare and Ramdhani sons Sukhai, Plot
No.373 mi area 0.0130 hectare Amrit Lal Bharti and Shravan Kumar
Sons Ramasare and Pyari Devi, wife of Ramasare and Smt. Ramdei Wife
Late Lokai, Plot No. 373 Mi. Area 0.0130 Hectare, Salik son Buddha's
name is recorded in the transferable landholder's account.
12. That the deponent respectfully submits that all the cultivators of Arazi
No. 373 are landholders with transferable rights and the cultivators of
Arazi No. 212 are landholders with transferable rights and Arazi No. 212
is land measuring 0.0310 hectares, which is listed in the barren category
5-3 (D) / other cultivable barren land, which was found in the shape of a
road on the spot, which is being used by the villagers as a road for the
CAPL No. 5090 of 2024
5

past several years. Arazi No. 212m area measuring 0.0310 hectares,
which is barren land, was found on the spot where no encroachment of
any kind was found. A true Photostat copy of Spot Memo, Najari Naksha,
Site Photographs and Khatauni are being filed herewith and marked as
Annexure No. 1 to this affidavit.
13. That the deponent further submits that in the above case, Case No.
443/2023 (Rajendra Prasad Singh vs. Ramchandra Singh) is pending in
the Court of Civil Judge (Judiciary), Chunar, Mirzapur, in respect of
which a status quo order has been passed by the Court. The next date for
hearing is 01.10.2026.
14. That in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the order dated
19.04.2024 passed in Public Interest Litigation (PIL) No. 83 of 2024
(Bijendra Bahadur Singh vs. State of U.P. and 6 others) as well as order
passed in the present contempt proceedings has not been disobeyed or
violated by the deponent.
15. That the deponent respectfully submits that he has been transferred
from the post of Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil Chunar, District Mirzapur
on 14.07.2026 and now took charge as Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil
Mugalsarai, District Chandauli.
16. That the deponent most respectfully submits that after receiving the
information/notice from Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur, the
deponent appeared on 22.09.2026 before him and submitted his
undertaking that he will appear before the Hon'ble High Court on the
date fixed i.e. 23.09.2026 and after making all formalities, he got bail on
22.09.2026. A true Photostat copy of the bail order dated 22.09.2026 is
being filed herewith and marked as Annexure-A-3 to this affidavit."

4. As per the affidavit already proceedings are pending in Case No. 443 of
2023 before the Court of Civil Judge (Judiciary) Chunar, Mirzapur in which
status quo order has been passed with respect to the same land.

5. In view of the same, there happens to be Substantial compliance of the
order. Accordingly, the contempt application is consigned to record,
leaving it open for the applicant to again approach as and when the occasion
arises.

6. The personal appearance of opposite party no. 1 who has been identified
by Sri Brijesh Kumar, is exempted.

September 23, 2026
Ashu
(Vikas Budhwar,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…