Neetu v. Sanjeev Kumar Maurya Officiating / Incharge Upper Mukhya Adhikari Zila Panchayat, Balrampur

Court No. - 4 Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 3088 of 2023 Applicant :- Neetu Opposite Party :- Sanjeev Kumar Maurya Officiating / Incharge Upper Mukhya Adhikari Zila Panchayat, Balrampur Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- Satish Chandra Kashish,Aniket Srivastav Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.C. Kashish, learned counsel for the sole opposite party.

¶2Sri S.C. Kashish, who has already filed Vakalatnama on behalf of sole opposite party/contemnor, has stated that the earlier Vakalatnama has been filed incorrectly, inasmuch as the opposite party, who has been impleaded in the contempt petition i.e. Sanjeev Kumar Maurya is officiating/incharge Upper Mukhya Adhikari Zila Panchayat, Balrampur. Today he is filing Vakalatnama on behalf of Sri Sanjeev Kumar Maurya who is presently serving as Chief Development Officer, Balrampur, the same is taken on record.

¶3Sri Kashish has submitted that the Writ Court vide order dated 09.11.2022, passed in Writ-A No. 7360 of 2022, had disposed of the writ petition without entering into merits of the issue directing the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner. He has further submitted that by means of order dated 06.11.2023, passed by Additional Chief Offficer, Jila Panchayat, Balrampur vide letter no. 506/RC/Adhi Li-Ji Pan/2023-24, the representation of the petitioner has been decided. Photocopy thereof has been provided to the Court and to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the same is taken on record. Sri Kashish has also submitted that there are some formalities which are to be completed by the petitioner which has been indicated in the aforesaid order, therefore, if the petitioner completes those formalities, she shall be paid her dues with expedition, preferably, within a period of 15 days.

¶4Be that as it may, if the representation of the petitioner has been decided vide order dated 06.11.2023, there is no purpose to keep this contempt petition pending any longer.

¶5Accordingly, the instant contempt petition is dismissed.

¶6Notices, if any, are discharged.

¶7However, it is always open for the petitioner to provide all the required documents to the authority concerned for getting her dues and if those documents have already been provided to the authority concerned, as stated by learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner may assail that order before the appropriate Court of law, if she feels herself aggrieved from that order. [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J] Order Date :- 7.11.2023 kkv/ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench