High Court · 2025

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1380 of 2025 Applicant :- Karm Singh @ K.S. Visen Opposite Party :- Smt. Neha Sharma, D.M. / Collector, Gonda And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Karan Singh Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. It is urged that a Division Bench of this Court in Writ-C No.9977 of 2024 had passed a detailed order on 22.11.2024 directing the Collector, Gonda to consider the issue and also verify the facts and thereafter guide his subordinate ofÏcers.

3. It is urged that apart from the fact that no compliance has been made of the aforesaid directions, rather on the contrary, the Collector has violated the order passed by the Division Bench as shall be evident from annexure no.3 as the Collector had taken note of a dispute in respect of a chak road in Samadhan Divas and has passed order thereupon demarcation has been made in respect of chak road which is on plot No.2007 whereas the plot of the petitioner is bearing no.2006. Thus, the Collector is guilty prima facie for deliberate and wilful disobedience.

4. The Court has considered the aforesaid submissions and also perused the material on record.

5. It will be appropriate to read meaningfully the order passed by the Division Bench dated 22.11.2024 and the same is being reproduced hereinafter: "Heard learned counsel for the parties. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner wants action to be taken against the opposite parties no. 2 to 4 for violating the government order dated 03-08-2022, by which, it has been provided that where matters are pending adjudication before the courts or Tribunals or where the interim orders are operating, the administrative officials should not pass administrative orders on the applications relating to such disputes, nor to interfere therein. He seeks disposal of his representation dated 19-10-2024. He also seeks a mandamus to opposite parties no. 2 to 4 to prohibit them from demarcating Gata Nos. 2006 & 2007 till the disposal of some proceedings under the Consolidation of Holdings Act for map corrections. We asked the learned counsel for the petitioner as to whether the consolidation operations are still pending, he could not give any satisfactory reply. However, he submitted that the land bearing Gata No. 2006 is in the form of a grove, therefore, it is not part of the consolidation proceedings. If it is so, then the burden was upon the petitioner to explain the application submitted by him under section 9a(2) of the Consolidation of Holdings Act on 14-08-2024, barely a few months ago for correction of Settlement Map. Nevertheless, we direct the Collector, Gonda to kindly look into the matter as to whether there is any dispute pending before the Consolidation Officer as per law, pertaining to Gata No. 2006 and if it is so, whether it is permissible to undertake any demarcation of the said gata by the revenue authorities during pendency of such proceedings or not and then, to guide the subordinate officers accordingly. It is however, made clear that we have not at all entered into the merits of the claim of the petitioner, nor as to whether such proceedings are validly pending before the Consolidation Officers or not, as the application has been submitted on 14-08-2024 and there is nothing on record before us to show that the consolidation operations were ever notified in Village-Belsar, Pargna- Dicksar, Tehsil-Tarabganj, District-Gonda, and were pending on the date of submission of such application and even otherwise, if they had already been denotified under section 52 of the Consolation of Holdings Act,1953,whether such application dated 14-08-2024, as contained in Annexure No. 4, would be maintainable or not. Therefore, he shall verify all these facts and then guide the subordinate officers accordingly. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly."

6. From the perusal of the aforesaid order, it reveals that the petitioner had approached the Division Bench with a limited prayer that in respect of certain private disputes which the petitioner had with the private respondents of the writ petition yet the authorities were interfering in the same which was against the government order dated 03.08.2022.

7. What is more important is the fact that a specific query was put by the Division Bench to the counsel for the petitioner in the writ petition as to whether any consolidation proceedings were in progress, to which no answer could be given.

8. The submission made by the counsel for the petitioner in the writ petition was noticed that even if at all the consolidation operations were in progress but the fact remains that the plot of the petitioner was bearing No.2006 which was a grove land and that would not be covered by the consolidation, hence it could not have any impact. The Division Bench also clearly recorded that the counsel for the petitioner could not give any satisfactory reply.

9. It is in the aforesaid backdrop that the Court had issued certain directions but per se the said directions are only in respect of administrative control over the subordinate ofÏcers of the Collector for smooth functioning. There was no direction given in the sense which had an impact on the petitioner which could be specifically enforced at the behest of the petitioner of which any wilful disobedience can be alleged.

10. As far as the reference to annexure no.3 is concerned, it is not disputed that was made by some other person in respect of chak road which necessarily is not a private property and belongs to the Gaon Sabha. In such circumstances, any order passed by the Collector in regard of the chak road which is for the benefit of the villagers, it cannot be said that there has been any violation in so far as the petitioner is concerned which may entitle the petitioner to press this petition for contempt.

11. This Court for the aforesaid reasons find that the petition is completely misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. This order may not impact any right of the petitioner in respect of his own property for which he is free to get his rights adjudicated in accordance with law. Order Date :- 6.5.2025 ALI NEWAZ KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1380 of 2025 Applicant :- Karm Singh @ K.S. Visen Opposite Party :- Smt. Neha Sharma, D.M. / Collector, Gonda And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Karan Singh Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. It is urged that a Division Bench of this Court in Writ-C No.9977 of 2024 had passed a detailed order on 22.11.2024 directing the Collector, Gonda to consider the issue and also verify the facts and thereafter guide his subordinate ofÏcers.

3. It is urged that apart from the fact that no compliance has been made of the aforesaid directions, rather on the contrary, the Collector has violated the order passed by the Division Bench as shall be evident from annexure no.3 as the Collector had taken note of a dispute in respect of a chak road in Samadhan Divas and has passed order thereupon demarcation has been made in respect of chak road which is on plot No.2007 whereas the plot of the petitioner is bearing no.2006. Thus, the Collector is guilty prima facie for deliberate and wilful disobedience.

4. The Court has considered the aforesaid submissions and also perused the material on record.

5. It will be appropriate to read meaningfully the order passed by the Division Bench dated 22.11.2024 and the same is being reproduced hereinafter: "Heard learned counsel for the parties. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner wants action to be taken against the opposite parties no. 2 to 4 for violating the government order dated 03-08-2022, by which, it has been provided that where matters are pending adjudication before the courts or Tribunals or where the interim orders are operating, the administrative officials should not pass administrative orders on the applications relating to such disputes, nor to interfere therein. He seeks disposal of his representation dated 19-10-2024. He also seeks a mandamus to opposite parties no. 2 to 4 to prohibit them from demarcating Gata Nos. 2006 & 2007 till the disposal of some proceedings under the Consolidation of Holdings Act for map corrections. We asked the learned counsel for the petitioner as to whether the consolidation operations are still pending, he could not give any satisfactory reply. However, he submitted that the land bearing Gata No. 2006 is in the form of a grove, therefore, it is not part of the consolidation proceedings. If it is so, then the burden was upon the petitioner to explain the application submitted by him under section 9a(2) of the Consolidation of Holdings Act on 14-08-2024, barely a few months ago for correction of Settlement Map. Nevertheless, we direct the Collector, Gonda to kindly look into the matter as to whether there is any dispute pending before the Consolidation Officer as per law, pertaining to Gata No. 2006 and if it is so, whether it is permissible to undertake any demarcation of the said gata by the revenue authorities during pendency of such proceedings or not and then, to guide the subordinate officers accordingly. It is however, made clear that we have not at all entered into the merits of the claim of the petitioner, nor as to whether such proceedings are validly pending before the Consolidation Officers or not, as the application has been submitted on 14-08-2024 and there is nothing on record before us to show that the consolidation operations were ever notified in Village-Belsar, Pargna- Dicksar, Tehsil-Tarabganj, District-Gonda, and were pending on the date of submission of such application and even otherwise, if they had already been denotified under section 52 of the Consolation of Holdings Act,1953,whether such application dated 14-08-2024, as contained in Annexure No. 4, would be maintainable or not. Therefore, he shall verify all these facts and then guide the subordinate officers accordingly. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly."

6. From the perusal of the aforesaid order, it reveals that the petitioner had approached the Division Bench with a limited prayer that in respect of certain private disputes which the petitioner had with the private respondents of the writ petition yet the authorities were interfering in the same which was against the government order dated 03.08.2022.

7. What is more important is the fact that a specific query was put by the Division Bench to the counsel for the petitioner in the writ petition as to whether any consolidation proceedings were in progress, to which no answer could be given.

8. The submission made by the counsel for the petitioner in the writ petition was noticed that even if at all the consolidation operations were in progress but the fact remains that the plot of the petitioner was bearing No.2006 which was a grove land and that would not be covered by the consolidation, hence it could not have any impact. The Division Bench also clearly recorded that the counsel for the petitioner could not give any satisfactory reply.

9. It is in the aforesaid backdrop that the Court had issued certain directions but per se the said directions are only in respect of administrative control over the subordinate ofÏcers of the Collector for smooth functioning. There was no direction given in the sense which had an impact on the petitioner which could be specifically enforced at the behest of the petitioner of which any wilful disobedience can be alleged.

10. As far as the reference to annexure no.3 is concerned, it is not disputed that was made by some other person in respect of chak road which necessarily is not a private property and belongs to the Gaon Sabha. In such circumstances, any order passed by the Collector in regard of the chak road which is for the benefit of the villagers, it cannot be said that there has been any violation in so far as the petitioner is concerned which may entitle the petitioner to press this petition for contempt.

11. This Court for the aforesaid reasons find that the petition is completely misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. This order may not impact any right of the petitioner in respect of his own property for which he is free to get his rights adjudicated in accordance with law. Order Date :- 6.5.2025 ALI NEWAZ KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench