Allahabad High Court
RAMAADHAR YADAVversusSHRI VIVEK MISHRA, IN-CHARGE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
- Decided
- Bench
- VIKAS BUDHWAR
Holding
The court held that while a prima facie case of contempt exists, it would not issue a notice but instead grant the opposite party time to comply, disposing the contempt application pending compliance.
Summary
Ramaadhar Yadav filed a contempt application against Shri Vivek Mishra, alleging willful defiance of an order dated 18‑05‑2026 passed in Writ‑A No. 7456 of 2026. The court noted that a prima facie case of contempt existed because the opposite party had not complied with the writ order despite service of a certified copy. However, the court declined to issue a notice at this stage and instead granted the opposite party an additional three months to comply. The court directed the applicant to provide stamped envelopes for service of the order and contempt application, and instructed the court office to forward these to the opposite party. The opposite party was ordered to comply with the writ court’s directions and inform the applicant within a week of compliance. The application was disposed pending compliance, with the applicant free to approach the court again if the order remains unfulfilled.
Issues considered
- Whether the opposite party's failure to comply with the writ order amounts to contempt of court
- Whether a notice should be issued to the opposite party in a contempt proceeding
- Whether the court should grant additional time for compliance before proceeding with contempt proceedings
Subjects
- contempt of court
- willful disobedience
- writ order compliance
- procedural directions
- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 6899 of 2026
Ramaadhar Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
Shri Vivek Mishra, In-Charge Executive Officer
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anupam Kumar Shukla
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 willful
defiance of the order dated 18.05.2026 passed in Writ-A No. 7456 of
2026, Ramaadhar Yadav Vs. State of U.P. and 4 Others.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that despite service
of certified copy of the order upon the opposite party, 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 18.05.2026 passed in Writ-A No. 7456 of 2026, Ramaadhar
Yadav Vs. State of U.P. and 4 Others 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
and keep a record thereof.
CAPL No. 6899 of 2026
2
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.)
October 1, 2026
N.S.Rathour
Digitally signed by :-
NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…