CAPL/1287/2026 of SAMEER Vs SRI SATYENDRA KUMAR, DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND 2 OTHERS

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1287 of 2026 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J. 1. The applicant, before this Court, along with other applicants had filed Writ-C No. 40011 of 2025 which was disposed of on 24.11.2025 and following order was passed:- "1. Petitioner is aggrieved for dispossession and demolition of construction in view of widening of road in Dal Mandi area of District Varanasi. The residents of the area have approached this Court vide writ petition being Writ C No. 12319 of 2025 (Shahnawaz Khan vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others) which stood disposed of on 20.5.2025. It is submitted that subsequently another petition being Writ C No. 31841 of 2025 (Mohammad Faheem And 4 Others vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others) also stood disposed of vide order dated 12.9.2025 in terms of order passed in the case of Shahnawaz Khan (supra). 2. Learned Standing Counsel submits that this petition may also be disposed of in terms of the order passed by this Court in Writ C No. 12319 of 2025 followed in the matter of Mohammad Faheem (supra) with further rider expressed in paragraph 6 of the order. 3. In view of the above, this petition also stands disposed of in terms of the observations made and directions issued in the matter of Shahnawaz Khan (Supra) with a further rider/view expressed by this Court in paragraph 6 of Writ C No. 31841 of 2025 (Mohammad Faheem and 4 Others vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others)." 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he is tenant of the accommodation in dispute and without complying the order of Division Bench, opposite parties are proceeding to demolish the shop in question. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dinesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Sameer .....Applicant(s) Sri Satyendra Kumar, District Magistrate And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) 3. Sri Anoop Trivedi, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State submits that owner of Building No. CK43/142 namely Sri Mirza Haroon, Sri Mohammad Sarwar Nooh, Smt. Sahiba Khan, Smt. Sahiba Ruhi Khan, Smt. Ariba Zahira, Smt. Saman Khan and Smt. Sufia Khan had executed a sale-deed in favour of Public Works Department on 12.01.2026 and 10.02.2026, copy of which has been collectively filed as annexure-4 to personal affidavit filed by District Magistrate, Varanasi. According to him, the owner of the said property is the State. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 5. It is a contempt application on the behest of tenant. The writ Court in Writ C No. 12319 of 2025 (Shahnawaz Khan vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others), decided on 20.05.2025, had held that the State can either negotiate with the owner or proceed for acquisition proceeding. 6. In the instant case, State has proceeded to purchase the property on the basis of mutual negotiation entered between the State and owner of the property and the owner of the property never approached this Court either before the writ Court or through contempt application. 7. No case for contempt is made out. 8. The contempt application is misconceived and stands dismissed. May 6, 2026 (V. S. SINGH) CAPL No. 1287 of 2026 2 (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIDYA SAGAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad