In a strongly worded order emphasizing the authority of courts, the Allahabad High Court has held that a party cannot refuse to comply with a judicial order merely because an application seeking its modification or vacation is pending. The Court found the District Inspector of Schools (DIOS), Ghazipur, guilty of contempt for failing to comply with an interim order directing payment of salary to a petitioner.
Background of the Case
The contempt proceedings arose from an interim order passed on April 18, 2022, in a pending writ petition. The order directed that the petitioner, Radhey Shyam Yadav, be paid his current salary during the pendency of the case.
According to the petitioner, despite the passage of four years, the salary was never paid. During the hearing, the DIOS argued that a stay-vacation application had been filed on behalf of the State and was still awaiting consideration before the writ court. On that basis, he requested the High Court to defer the contempt proceedings.
Justice Kshitij Shailendra rejected the argument and made it clear that filing an application seeking recall, modification, clarification, or vacation of an order does not automatically suspend the operation of that order.
The Court observed, “Unless the competent Court modifies, stays, recalls, or vacates its earlier order, the order continues to operate with full binding force.”
The judge noted that the stay-vacation application had remained pending for nearly four years and there was no material on record to show that serious efforts had been made to secure its early hearing.
Distinguishing earlier Supreme Court decisions cited by the State, the Court held that the facts of the present case were different because the interim order had remained operative for years and had never been stayed or vacated.
The Court used the occasion to underline the importance of obeying judicial orders. It observed that the authority of constitutional courts depends not merely on passing orders but on their enforcement and compliance.
The bench remarked that permitting parties to ignore court directions merely because an application is pending would undermine public faith in the justice delivery system and weaken the rule of law.
The Court further observed, “An order of the Court, right or wrong, must be obeyed so long as it subsists.”
After considering the facts, the High Court held that the pendency of a stay-vacation application could not justify non-compliance with the interim order directing payment of salary.
The Court found the opposite party guilty of contempt of the order dated April 18, 2022, and directed that the matter be listed on July 8, 2026, for framing of charges against the newly impleaded District Inspector of Schools, who was ordered to remain personally present before the Court.
The Court also observed that compliance with the writ court’s order could still enable the contemnor to purge the contempt.
Case Details:-
Case Title: Radhey Shyam Yadav v. Sri Ashok Nath Tiwari, the District Inspector of Schools
Case Number: Contempt Application (Civil) No. 6468 of 2022
Judge: Justice Kshitij Shailendra
Decision Date: May 19, 2026
