High CourtsSingle Bench

Jogendra Lal vs Pankaj Kumar Pandey & Another

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 2 August 2021 · Citation: (2021) 08 UK CK 0002

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manoj K. Tiwari, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Contempt Petition No. 319 Of 2021
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 · 226 words

Manoj K. Tiwari, J

1.

Writ petition (M/S) No. 1040 of 2019 filed by the petitioner was disposed of with a direction to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Khatima, District

Udham Singh Nagar to decide petitioner’s representation within sixty days.

2.

In this contempt petition, petitioner contends that although Sub-Divisional Magistrate has passed an order on 03.07.2019, wherein it has been

provided that petitioner may be given some alternative land, however, according to learned counsel for the petitioner, Sub-Divisional Magistrate

concerned has forwarded the matter to District Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar and the District Magistrate in turn referred the matter to the State

Government and the matter is now pending before the State Government.

3.

Since the direction issued by Writ Court was only to Sub-Divisional Magistrate concerned and not to Secretary, Revenue, therefore, Secretary

cannot be proceded against under provision of Contempt of Courts Act.

4.

In such view of the matter, contempt notice cannot be issued to the opposite parties. However, having regard to the facts of the case, contempt

petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Secretary, Revenue, Uttarakhand by making a representation within two weeks from

today. If such a representation is made within stipulated time, decision thereupon shall be taken as early as possible, preferably within three months

from the date of production of certified copy of this order.