Allahabad High Court

ASHOK KUMAR KURIL AND 7 OTHERSversusMR. ARPIT UPADHYAY, THE NAGAR AYUKT NAGAR NIGAM KANPUR NAGAR

Decided: 23 September 2026
Bench: VIKAS BUDHWAR

Holding

The High Court held that the writ court's order had been complied with and therefore consigned the contempt application to the record.

Summary

The applicants filed a contempt application alleging that the opposite party, represented by counsel Munna Pandey, willfully disobeyed the High Court's judgment dated 13 February 2026 in Writ‑A No. 10931 of 2026. The court noted that a Special Leave Petition (C) No. 22623 of 2026 (Janki Devi v. State of U.P.) had been dismissed, and that the opposite party had produced an order dated 11 August 2026 indicating a pending review before the Apex Court. A correction application was later allowed, changing the date of the original order to 13 May 2026. Upon examination, the compliance affidavit showed that the writ court's order had been complied with, and the applicant’s counsel did not dispute this. Consequently, the court consigned the contempt application to the record, effectively dismissing it.

Issues considered

Whether the opposite party willfully disobeyed the High Court's order dated 13 February 2026 (later corrected to 13 May 2026).
Whether the pending review application and the compliance affidavit bar the proceeding of the contempt application.
Whether the correction of the date in the original order affects the contempt proceedings.

Legislation cited

Constitution of India — s. Article 136

Subjects

contempt of court
willful disobedience
writ jurisdiction
review application
correction application
special leave petition
compliance affidavit
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 5343 of 2026

Ashok Kumar Kuril and 7 others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

Mr. Arpit Upadhyay, The Nagar Ayukt Nagar
Nigam Kanpur Nagar .....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Qazi Vakil Ahmad
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Harshit Pandey, Munna Pandey

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

1. This Court on 12.08.2026 proceeded to pass the following orders:-

"1. Vakalatnama has been filed on behalf of Shri Munna Pandey (A/M 0659/2012)
and Sri Harshit Pandey (A/H 0022/2018), counsel for opposite party, is taken on
record.
2. Supplementary affidavit, filed today, is taken on record.
3. The present contempt application has been filed for punishing the Opposite Party
for willful disobedience of the judgment and order dated 13.02.2026 passed by this
Court in Writ-A No. 10931 of 2026.
4. It has been apprised to the Court that a Special Leave Petition (C) No. 22623 of
2026 (Janki Devi v. State of U.P.) came to be preferred, in which on 07.07.2026, the
following orders have been passed:
"1. We do not find a good ground to interfere with the impugned order/judgment in
exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.Accordingly,
the special leave petition stands dismissed.
2. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of."
5. Allegation of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the opposite party are
siding with the tenants/ encroachers.
6. Today Shri Munna Pandey without there being any notice issued to the opposite
party has stood up and he has made a statement at bar that he has instructions in the
matter. He has produced before this Court an order dated 11.08.2026 which is taken
on record and marked as appendix- A.
7. A perusal of the same would go to show that a review application has been
preferred before the Hon'ble Apex Court.
8. Shri Munna Pandey who claims to have obtained instructions on behalf of the
opposite party submits that 15 days' time has been accorded to the tenant/ encroacher
to obtain orders in the review which is stated to be pending. According to him, after
15 days, suitable action would be taken in this regard for compliance of the order of
CAPL No. 5343 of 2026
2

the writ court.
9. Put up this case on 09.09.2026 at 2.00 PM in the additional cause list, by which
time, an affidavit be filed regarding compliance in that regard.
10. When the matter is next listed, the name of Shri Munna Pandey and Sri Harshit
Pandey shall be shown from the opposite party side."

2. On 18.08.2026, following orders were passed:-

"In Re: Correction Application No.1 of 2026
1. By way of correction application, correction has been sought in the order dated
12.08.2026 in para-3 line no.3 for deletion of the date 13.02.2026 while substituting
the same with 13.05.2026.
2. The correction application is allowed accordingly."

3. Today, a perusal of the compliance affidavit would reveal that the order of
the writ- Court has been complied with.

4. The counsel for the applicant does not dispute the same.

5. In view of the above, the contempt application is consigned to record.

September 24, 2026
N.S.Rathour

(Vikas Budhwar,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…