Allahabad High Court
PARASHU RAM MAURYAversusMISS APARNA U. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY LAND ACQUISITION GOVERNMENT OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- VIKAS BUDHWAR
Holding
While a prima facie case of contempt exists, the court held that the respondents should be given a further three months to comply with the original order before any contempt proceedings are pursued.
Summary
Parashu Ram Maurya filed a contempt application alleging that the Government of U.P. and other respondents failed to comply with the order dated 23 July 2025 in Writ‑A No. 41065 of 2025, which directed them to decide a claim. The applicant claimed that a copy of the order had been served but no action was taken. The court observed that a prima facie case of willful disobedience existed but declined to issue a notice at this stage. Instead, the court granted the respondents an additional three months to comply and prescribed a procedure for service of the order via registered envelopes. The court directed the applicant to provide the necessary envelopes and stated that if compliance is not achieved, the applicant may approach the court again. The contempt application was therefore disposed of pending compliance.
Issues considered
- Does the respondents' failure to act on the order dated 23‑07‑2025 amount to contempt of court?
- Should a notice be issued before proceeding with contempt proceedings?
- Is it appropriate to grant the respondents additional time to comply with the original order?
Subjects
- civil contempt
- non‑compliance with court order
- writ petition
- contempt application
- procedural directions
- land acquisition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 6755 of 2026
Parashu Ram Maurya
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
Miss Aparna U. Principal Secretary Land
Acquisition Government Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Niraj Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :
Court No. - 53
HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant.
2. The present contempt application has been preferred alleging non-
compliance of the order dated 23.7.2025 passed in Writ-A No. 41065 of
2025 whereby the writ petition was disposed of directing the opposite
party to decide the claim.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that copy of the
order was served but till date the order of writ Court has not been
complied with.
4. Prima facie, a case has been made out for punishing the opposite party
for willful disobedience of the judgment and order passed in the aforesaid
writ petition.
5. However, no notice is issued to the opposite party at this stage. The
opposite party is granted three months further time to comply with the
order dated 23.7.2025 passed by this Court in Writ-A No. 41065 of
2025 from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
6. The applicant shall supply a duly stamped registered envelope
addressed to the opposite party and another self-addressed envelope to the
office within two weeks from today. The office shall send a copy of this
order along with the self-addressed envelope of the applicant with a copy
of contempt application to the opposite party within one week thereafter
CAPL No. 6755 of 2026
2
and keep a record thereof.
7. The opposite party shall comply with the directions of the writ court
and intimate the applicant the order through the self-addressed envelop
within a week thereafter.
8. In case, the opposite party does not comply with the order, it would be
open to the applicant to approach this court again.
9. With the aforesaid observations, this application is finally disposed of
at this stage.
(Vikas Budhwar,J.)
September 24, 2026
Rajesh
Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…