Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

CHANDAN SINGH RATHI versus DISTT. MAGISTRATE & ANOTHER

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Chandan Singh Rathi v. Distt. Magistrate & Another - SPECIAL APPEAL No. 900 of 2003 [2007] RD-AH 4843 (20 March 2007)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon'ble S. Rafat Alam, J.

Hon'ble Krishna Murari, J.

Shri M.D. Singh Shekhar, learned counsel for the appellant vehemently contended that despite order dated 29.9.2003 of the Division Bench even subsistence allowance has not been paid to the appellant.  It is also submitted that though they should have completed the proceeding within six months but till date nothing has been done and the appellant is running from pillar to post.

At the time of admission of appeal the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents was granted four weeks' time to file counter affidavit, yet the respondents did not chose to file counter affidavit, though more than three years period has elapsed.  However, Shri Pankaj Rai, learned Standing Counsel submitted that as the last indulgence three weeks' time may be granted to him to file counter affidavit.  Considering his request, as the last indulgence three weeks' time is granted to file counter affidavit failing which respondent nos.1 and 2 are directed to appear in person on the next date.  We are of the view that non-filing of counter affidavit by the State authorities, despite order of this Court, amounts to interference with the administration of justice and, therefore, they can be proceeded for flouting this Court's order and can be punished under the Contempt of Courts' Act.

Let the matter appear again on 17.4.2007.  

Let a copy of this order be furnished to Shri Pankaj Rai, learned Standing Counsel for communicating this order to both the respondents.

20.3.2007

A.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.