(1.) Before deciding the present application for recall of the order dated 14- 5-2002 passed by this Court issuing Notice to O. P. S. Malik, it is necessary to state the facts giving rise to the application filed for contempt and the proceedings taken by this Court.
(2.) Naresh Chandra Kapoor, hereinafter referred to as the petitioner, who has filed the present petition under Section 12 of the Contempt of courts Act, 1971, hereinafter referred to as the Act, for the alleged violation and disobedience of the order dated 16/03/1993 passed by this Court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. Nil of 1993 (Naresh Chandra Kapoor v. Smt. Sayeeda Farooqui and others, is the landlord and owner of House No. 12/24 Hastings Road (Nyaya Marg), Allahabad. He had filed a Small Causes Court Suit being SCC Suit No. 19 of 1982 for ejectment of Smt. Sayeeda Farooqui and others. It was decreed by the Additional District Judge, Allahabad on 2 7/04/1985. Smt. Sayeeda Farooqui filed Revision No. 325 of 1985 before this Court. The petitioner also filed an application under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 before the Prescribed Authority which was registered as Case No. 113 of 1983 for release of the premises on the ground of bona fide requirement. It is alleged that during the pendency of the revision Smt. Sayeeda Farooqui and another person were on a look out to pass on illegal possession of the premises to third persons and contacted O. P. S. Malik, opposite party No.1. He moved an application for allotment. While the application for allotment was pending the petitioner apprehended that the Prescribed Authority may allot the premises in favour of the opposite party No. 1 as he was an I. P. S. Officer and was holding a very high position in the district being the D. I. G., C. R. P. F., Allahabad. The petitioner also apprehended that the Prescribed Authority is colluding with the opposite party No. 1. He approached this Court by filing Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. Nil of 1993 in which this Court passed the following order on 1 6/03/1993: "Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is asserted that in the facts and circumstances of the present case, specially considering the ratio of the decision of this Court in the case of B. D. Seth v. Vth Additional City Magistrate reported in 1988 (2) All Rent Cas 442 : (1988 All LJ 1365), no vacancy could have been deemed to come into existence so as to confer jurisdiction on the Rent Control and Eviction Officer to proceed under Section 16 of the Act. It is further asserted that the date fixed in the case was preponed without any notice to the petitioner. Apart from the normal mode of Service, the petitioner shall serve the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4 out of Court, for which purpose, if the requisite steps taken by 2 2/03/1993, the office shall handover necessary notices etc., to the learned counsel for the petitioner. The notices issued shall indicate that the writ petition shall be listed for admission on 19/04/1993 by which date the said respondents may file a counter affidavit. An affidavit of service shall be filed within 15 days. List this petition for admission on 19/04/1993. In the meanwhile, the further proceedings consequent upon the order dated 20- 2-1993 as well as the order dated 12-3-1993 shall remain stayed till 19/04/1993".
(3.) It is alleged by the petitioner that when he along with one of his sons went to serve a certified copy of the order dated 1 6/03/1993 passed by this Court upon O. P. S. Malik, opposite party No 1 and S. N. Pandey, Prescribed Authority, opposite party No.2 at the residence, the opposite party No. 1 was present at the residence of opposite party No.2 in Collectorate compound. The opposite party No. 1 took the order and after seeing the same he returned it back to the petitioner with abusive language to the petitioner as well as the Hon'ble Judges of this Court. The words which were said to have been uttered by O. P. S. Malik and as alleged by the petitioner are being reproduced below :