Allahabad High Court
AJAY KUMAR SINGHversusMR. P. GURU PRASAD, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- VIKAS BUDHWAR
Holding
Substantial compliance with the earlier order negates the finding of contempt, and the contempt application is consigned to the record.
Summary
The High Court of Allahabad entertained a contempt application filed by Ajay Kumar Singh alleging willful defiance of its earlier order dated 12 March 2025 in Writ‑A No. 3428 of 2026, which had directed the Ministry of Urban Development to decide the petitioner’s representation dated 9 January 2026 within two months. The petitioner claimed that the representation had not been decided, while the respondent argued it would be decided in a time‑bound manner. The Court noted that instructions dated 16 September 2026 showed that the representation had been decided, constituting substantial compliance with the earlier order. Consequently, the Court recorded the instructions as Appendix ‘A’ and consigned the contempt application to the record, effectively dismissing it while leaving the petitioner free to raise any further grievance in appropriate proceedings. The decision underscores the Court’s supervisory jurisdiction under Article 226 to enforce its orders and to deal with contempt where compliance is demonstrated.
Issues considered
- Whether the respondent’s alleged non‑compliance with the Court’s order amounts to contempt of court
- Whether the submission of instructions showing compliance suffices to discharge the contempt allegation
Legislation cited
- Constitution of India — s. Article 226
Subjects
- contempt of court
- writ of mandamus
- Article 226
- civil contempt
- compliance with court order
- retirement dues
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 5962 of 2026
Ajay Kumar Singh
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
Mr. P. Guru Prasad, Principal Secretary, Ministry
Of Urban Development, U.P. .....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhai Kumar Singh, Devi Prasad
Tripathi
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 12.03.2025 passed in Writ-A No. 3428 of 2026,
order whereof is quoted hereinunder.-
"1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for
respondent no.3 and learned Standing Counsel for the State.
2. The writ petition is filed with the following prayers:-
"i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus
commanding the respondent no.2 to decide the representation of the
petitioner dated 09.01.2026 in view of judgment rendered in Principal
Special Appeal No.607 of 2024 (State of U.P. and 2 others Vs. Chandra
Mohan Yadav) which stood disposed of vide order dated 06.05.2025 and
to settle all the pending retiral dues in favour of petitioner including
pension and other benefits accruing from unblemished services of the
petitioner, which exercise may be undertaken within stipulated period of
time which may be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court in exercise of extra-
ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India."
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has
filed a representation dated 9.1.2026 before the respondent no. 2,
however, till date the aforesaid representation of the petitioner has not
been decided by the concerned authority.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the representation of
the petitioner would be decided by respondent no. 2 in accordance with
CAPL No. 5962 of 2026
2
law in a time bound manner.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the
submissions of learned counsel for the parties, it is hereby directed that
respondent no. 2 shall decide the representation dated 9.1.2026 filed by
the petitioner in light of the direction issued in Special Appeal No.607 of
2024 (State of U.P. and others Vs. Chandra Mohan Yadav ) within a
period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this
order.
6. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition stands
disposed of."
2. Today, instructions have been produced, according to which, the order
of the writ Court stands complied with on 16.09.2026 deciding the claim.
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 'A'.
(Vikas Budhwar,J.)
September 23, 2026
Rajesh
Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…