High Court

2. Shri Savitra Vardhan Singh, Advocate has submitted that now he is no more counsel to the respondent no. 2.

3. Shri Namit Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 has filed an application for exemption from personal appearance of respondent no. 2-Shri Indrajeet Singh, Nagar Ayukt (Municipal Commissioner) Nagar Nigam, Lucknow.

4. Present contempt petition has been preferred for alleged non compliance of the judgment and order dated 16.04.2024 passed by the Writ Court in Writ A No. 2946 of 2024. The relevant extract of the said judgment is being reproduced hereinbelow:- "Consequently, the impugned order dated 20.9.2023 passed by the Municipal Commissioner, Lucknow is hereby quashed. The matter is remitted back to the Municipal Commissioner, Lucknow to take decision afresh with speaking and reasoned order, within a period of eight weeks from the date of the production of the certified copy of this order, considering the provisions of Government Order dated 11.11.2019, which provides the benefit of family pension to the heirs of the deceased employee. (Petitioner is unmarried daughter of the deceased employee). It is further observed that if the decision is taken that the present petitioner is entitled for family pension, the family pension will be granted to the petitioner from the date on which the petitioner became entitled for such family pension and interest thereon shall also be paid to her, as per the Rules."

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant had made a representation to the concerned authorities and when the order of the Writ Court was not complied with, she had no other option but to approach this Court by filing present contempt petition in which after some dates, when the case was listed on 15.10.2024, the respondent no. 2 had filed an application for discharge of contempt notice and dismissal of the contempt petition by making an averment in affidavit that an order dated 24.08.2024 has been passed in favour of the applicant after considering the Government Order dated 11.11.2019 and the family pension as also regular pension is being paid to the applicant after the demise of her father. On that date, the counsel for the applicant has submitted that father of the applicant had expired on 20.10.2022 whereas the pension has been granted w.e.f. 10.05.2024 in place of 20.10.2022, thus, two weeks' time was sought by learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 to comply with the order of the Writ Court in its letter and spirit.

6. Thereafter, the matter was taken up on 07.01.2025. On that date also, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 sought two weeks' further time for compliance of judgment and order of the Writ Court in its letter and spirit. It was made clear in the order dated 07.01.2025 that if the compliance affidavit is not filed by the next date fixed, the respondent no. 2 shall appear in person before this Court for the purposes of framing charges and fixed this case for today i.e. 27.01.2025.

7. Today when the case was taken up, an affidavit has been filed alongwith application for exemption from personal appearance of respondent no. 2. In the affidavit, an averment has been made in para no. 6 i.e " the file of the applicant/petitioner is in process in light of the compliance of order passed by the Writ Court and because of some clerical error it cannot be processed hence some reasonable time be granted to file the affidavit of compliance in light of order dated 16.04.2024 passed in Writ A No. 2946 of 2024". The said averment has been made despite the fact that opportunities had been granted by this Court to comply with the order of the Writ Court and specific assurance was given on behalf of respondent no. 2 for filing compliance affidavit.

8. On being asked from learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 that as to whether the order dated 24.08.2024 has been passed without going through the file of the applicant/petitioner granting family pension, he has replied that it must have been perused and thereafter, the order was passed. The respondent no. 2 has passed an order dated 24.08.2024 in favour of the applicant and in pursuance thereof, the family pension is being paid to the applicant after demise of her father, meaning thereby, the date of death must have been accepted by the respondent no. 2 and only thereafter, the order was passed and accordingly, payment of family pension is being paid to the applicant.

9. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record of the case, it is found that it must have been verified before making payment of family pension to the applicant that as to whether the applicant is entitled or not, so taking such cryptic grounds for exemption from personal appearance and non-compliance of the order of the Writ Court despite opportunities being granted by this Court is nothing but intentional and wilful disobedience of the judgment and order of the Writ Court.

10. In the aforesaid circumstances, a case under Rule 5 of Chapter XXXV-E of Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 (Rules framed under Section 23 of Contempt of Courts Act,1971) is made out, accordingly, the following charge is being framed against the respondent nos. 2-Shri Indrajeet Singh, Nagar Ayukt (Municipal Commissioner), Nagar Nigam, Lucknow:- "Why contemnor - respondent no. 2 be not punished for willful and deliberate disobedience of the judgement and order dated 16.04.2024 passed in Writ A No. 2946 of 2024 (Km. Nidhi Vs. The State of U.P. and others).

11. The respondent no. 2-Shri Indrajeet Singh, Nagar Ayukt (Municipal Commissioner), Nagar Nigam, Lucknow is granted two weeks' time to file reply to the aforesaid charge.

12. List this case in the week commencing 17.02.2025.

13. On that date, the respondent no. 2 shall appear before this Court. Order Date :- 27.1.2025 Ashish

2. Shri Savitra Vardhan Singh, Advocate has submitted that now he is no more counsel to the respondent no. 2.

3. Shri Namit Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 has filed an application for exemption from personal appearance of respondent no. 2-Shri Indrajeet Singh, Nagar Ayukt (Municipal Commissioner) Nagar Nigam, Lucknow.

4. Present contempt petition has been preferred for alleged non compliance of the judgment and order dated 16.04.2024 passed by the Writ Court in Writ A No. 2946 of 2024. The relevant extract of the said judgment is being reproduced hereinbelow:- "Consequently, the impugned order dated 20.9.2023 passed by the Municipal Commissioner, Lucknow is hereby quashed. The matter is remitted back to the Municipal Commissioner, Lucknow to take decision afresh with speaking and reasoned order, within a period of eight weeks from the date of the production of the certified copy of this order, considering the provisions of Government Order dated 11.11.2019, which provides the benefit of family pension to the heirs of the deceased employee. (Petitioner is unmarried daughter of the deceased employee). It is further observed that if the decision is taken that the present petitioner is entitled for family pension, the family pension will be granted to the petitioner from the date on which the petitioner became entitled for such family pension and interest thereon shall also be paid to her, as per the Rules."

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant had made a representation to the concerned authorities and when the order of the Writ Court was not complied with, she had no other option but to approach this Court by filing present contempt petition in which after some dates, when the case was listed on 15.10.2024, the respondent no. 2 had filed an application for discharge of contempt notice and dismissal of the contempt petition by making an averment in affidavit that an order dated 24.08.2024 has been passed in favour of the applicant after considering the Government Order dated 11.11.2019 and the family pension as also regular pension is being paid to the applicant after the demise of her father. On that date, the counsel for the applicant has submitted that father of the applicant had expired on 20.10.2022 whereas the pension has been granted w.e.f. 10.05.2024 in place of 20.10.2022, thus, two weeks' time was sought by learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 to comply with the order of the Writ Court in its letter and spirit.

6. Thereafter, the matter was taken up on 07.01.2025. On that date also, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 sought two weeks' further time for compliance of judgment and order of the Writ Court in its letter and spirit. It was made clear in the order dated 07.01.2025 that if the compliance affidavit is not filed by the next date fixed, the respondent no. 2 shall appear in person before this Court for the purposes of framing charges and fixed this case for today i.e. 27.01.2025.

7. Today when the case was taken up, an affidavit has been filed alongwith application for exemption from personal appearance of respondent no. 2. In the affidavit, an averment has been made in para no. 6 i.e " the file of the applicant/petitioner is in process in light of the compliance of order passed by the Writ Court and because of some clerical error it cannot be processed hence some reasonable time be granted to file the affidavit of compliance in light of order dated 16.04.2024 passed in Writ A No. 2946 of 2024". The said averment has been made despite the fact that opportunities had been granted by this Court to comply with the order of the Writ Court and specific assurance was given on behalf of respondent no. 2 for filing compliance affidavit.

8. On being asked from learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 that as to whether the order dated 24.08.2024 has been passed without going through the file of the applicant/petitioner granting family pension, he has replied that it must have been perused and thereafter, the order was passed. The respondent no. 2 has passed an order dated 24.08.2024 in favour of the applicant and in pursuance thereof, the family pension is being paid to the applicant after demise of her father, meaning thereby, the date of death must have been accepted by the respondent no. 2 and only thereafter, the order was passed and accordingly, payment of family pension is being paid to the applicant.

9. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record of the case, it is found that it must have been verified before making payment of family pension to the applicant that as to whether the applicant is entitled or not, so taking such cryptic grounds for exemption from personal appearance and non-compliance of the order of the Writ Court despite opportunities being granted by this Court is nothing but intentional and wilful disobedience of the judgment and order of the Writ Court.

10. In the aforesaid circumstances, a case under Rule 5 of Chapter XXXV-E of Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 (Rules framed under Section 23 of Contempt of Courts Act,1971) is made out, accordingly, the following charge is being framed against the respondent nos. 2-Shri Indrajeet Singh, Nagar Ayukt (Municipal Commissioner), Nagar Nigam, Lucknow:- "Why contemnor - respondent no. 2 be not punished for willful and deliberate disobedience of the judgement and order dated 16.04.2024 passed in Writ A No. 2946 of 2024 (Km. Nidhi Vs. The State of U.P. and others).

11. The respondent no. 2-Shri Indrajeet Singh, Nagar Ayukt (Municipal Commissioner), Nagar Nigam, Lucknow is granted two weeks' time to file reply to the aforesaid charge.

12. List this case in the week commencing 17.02.2025.

13. On that date, the respondent no. 2 shall appear before this Court. Order Date :- 27.1.2025 Ashish