CourtKutchehry.com
High Courts

Anil Kumar Tripathi vs Madan Mohan Singh, Commissioner,. U.P. Rural Housing Board, Lucknow and another

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 10 February 2004 · Citation: (2004) 02 AHC CK 0098

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.P.Mehrotra, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Section 12
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 2109 of 1992
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 448 words

S.P. Mehrotra, J.

1.

The present Contempt Petition has been filed under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 by the petitionerapplicant (Anil Kumar Tripathi). It is, interdict prayed in the Contempt Petition that the Opposite Parties be punished for allegedly having committed contempt of this Court by disobeying the order dated 2.7.1992 passed by this Court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 22878 of 1992 (Sheo Pujan Prasad Pal and another v. IIP, Rural Housing Board and another).

The Contempt Petition was filed on 20.11.1992.

By the order dated 23.11.1992 passed on the Contempt Petition, notice was directed to be issued to the Opposite Party No. 2 (Harban Singh).

By the order dated 3.2.2004, the present Contempt Petition was directed to be listed along with the record of the aforesaid Writ Petition No. 22878 of 1992.

Pursuant to the said order dated 3.2.2004, the case is listed today along with the record of the aforesaid Writ Petition.

2.

It may be mentioned that the said Anil Kumar Tripathi petitionerapplicant in the Contempt Petition, was petitioner No. 2 in the aforesaid Writ Petition No. 22878 of 1992.,

3.

A perusal of the record of the aforesaid Writ Petition shows that an application dated 8.9.1997 being Civil Misc. Application No. 57490 of 1997 was filed in the said Writ Petition on behalf of the said Anil Kumar Tirpathi (petitioner No. 2 in the said Writ Petition).

4.

It was, interalia, prayed in the said application filed in the aforesaid Writ Petition that the aforesaid Writ Petition in so far as the same related to the said Anil Kumar Tripathi, petitioner No. 2, be dismissed as infructuous. Accordingly, aforesaid Writ Petition was dismissed as infructuous in so far as the same related to the said Anil Kumar Tripathi, petitioner No. 2 by the order dated 30.9.1997 passed in the aforesaid Writ Petition.

5.

The present Contempt Petition, as noted above, was filed by the said Anil Kumar Tripathi, who was petitioner No. 2 in the aforesaid Writ Petition. As the aforesaid Writ Petition is so far as it related to the said Anil Kumar Tripathi was dismissed by the order dated 30.9.1997, it is evident that the present Contempt Petition had become infructuous.

6.

In view of the aforesaid, I am of the opinion that the show cause notice issued to the Opposite Party No. 2 is liable to be discharged, and the same is accordingly discharged.

The Contempt Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

7.

The record of the aforesaid Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 22878 of 1992, which is appended to the present Contempt Petition, will be detached and sent to the concerned Section. Petition disposed of.