- (1.) S. P. Mehrotra, J. The present contempt petition has been filed under Sections 10/12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. It is, inter alia, prayed in the contempt petition that the opposite parties be punished for having committed contempt of this Court by non-compliance of the order dated 12-11-1991 passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 24117 of 1991, Ramswarup v. State of U. P. through Collector, Shahjahanpur and others.
(2.) BY the order dated 17-2-1993, notice was directed to be issued to the opposite party No. 1 (Rahul Bhatnagar) to show-cause as to why action be not taken against him for disobedience of the said order dated 12-11-1991 passed in the aforesaid Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 24117 of 1991. In response to the notice issued on the contempt petition, the said Rahul Bhatnagar (opposite party No. 1) filed his counter-affidavit sworn on 15-7-1993. A perusal of paragraph 4 of the affidavit accompanying the contempt petition shows that by the order dated 12-11-1991 passed in the aforesaid Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 24117 of 1991, the said writ petition was disposed of with the direction to the Collector, Shahjahanpur to decide the representation of the petitioner/applicant within the period mentioned in the said order dated 12-11-1991.
(3.) IT is, inter alia, alleged in the affidavit accompanying the contempt petition that the petitioner/applicant filed his representation dated 16-1-1992 alongwith certified copy of the said order dated 12-11-1991, but the directions given in the order dated 12-11-1991 were not complied with. In paragraph 4 of the counter-affidavit filed by the said Rahul Bhatnagar (opposite party No. 1), it is, inter alia, stated that in compliance with the said order dated 12-11-1991 passed in the said Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 24117 of 1991, the representation of the petitioner/applicant had already been disposed of by the said Rahul Bhatnagar (opposite party No. 1) on 5-8-1992 after having the detailed enquiry and perusal of the materials, reports and evidence submitted by various authorities; and that the copy of the order dated 5-8-1992 passed by the said Rahul Bhatnagar (opposite party No. 1) alongwith the notice of the information through Tehsildar dated 10-8-1992 had already been made to the petitioner/applicant. Copy of the said order dated 5-8-1992 has been filed as Annexure-CA-9 to the said counter-affidavit, as is evident from the averments made in paragraph 6 of the said counter- affidavit.;