Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The Allahabad HC recently dropped the contempt proceedings that were initiated against a district magistrate at the instance of a litigant. The bench, comprising of Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, declared that the complaint against District Magistrate, Suhas LY, was made by the litigant with the intention of coercing him into giving a favorable judgement.
By way of background, the DM was directed by the HC to examine in a case, keeping in mind the law laid by the a divisional bench of the court in the case of Shivram Singh v. State of U.P. and Ors. The contempt petition was then filed alleging that the DM, despite the orders by the High Court, had not passed any order on the representation made by the petitionerbut had nevertheless rejected the petitioner’s claim and disposed of the petition.
A single judge then acted upon the complaint and sought to knowthrough an order passed on 28 May this year, why any action shouldn’t be initiated against the DM for his conduct. Consequent tot this order, the DM then constituted a committee consisting of four officers to submit a meticulous report. The said committee, after a thorough examination of the entire record, submitted their report negating the petitioner’s claim. Thereafter, the DM proceeded to examine the record and the committee’s report in light of the judgment given in Shivram Singh’s case and rejected the petitioner’s claim.
While the development was made known to the single judge, he had declared that till the order passed in May held the field, the stand taken by the DM to reject the petitioner’s claim won’t be accepted. However, the DM was granted the liberty tofile a review petition against the order passed in May. The DM, represented by Advocate Anoop Trivedi, challenged the order and contended that he had complied with the High Court’s order to examine the record in the light of the judgment in Shivram Singh’s case, and hence, requested the court to quash the contempt proceedings initiated against him.The court therefore allowed the appeal, setting aside the contempt proceedings.
86540
103860
630
114
59824