2026 Supreme(Online)(All) 98246
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Madrasa Islamia Safinatul – Appellant
Versus
Ravindra Nayak – Respondent
CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2725 of 2021
##PAGE1##
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2725 of 2021 C/M Madrasa Islamia Safinatul And Another .....Applicant(s)
Versus Sri K. Ravindra Nayak,Principal/Additional Chief Secretary .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : J.P. Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Shad Khan, Shishir Prakash Court No. - 7 HON'BLE PIYUSH AGRAWAL, J.
1. Heard Mr. G.K. Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. J.P. Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Manish Goyal, learned A.A.G. assisted by Mr. Brijesh Kumar, learned Standing Counsel.
2. In pursuance of earlier order, respondent no.4/Ms. Sanyukta Samaddar, Principal Secretary, Minority Welfare and Waqf, U.P. Government, Lucknow, is present before the Court who has been identified by Mr. Brijesh Kumar, learned Standing Counsel.
3. On 24.09.2026, the following order was passed:
"1. This Court on 08.09.2026 proceeded to pass the following orders:-
"1. On 24.08.2026, this Court proceeded to pass the following orders were passed.-
"1. The present contempt petition has been preferred alleging non- compliance of the order dated 25.11.2020 passed in Writ-C No. 13568 of
2020, the order whereof is quoted hereinunder:
"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
The present petition has been filed by the petitioner claiming itself to be
registered Society, it is stated that the said Society registered as Madarsa
known as "Islamia Safinatul Hedaya, Meerpur Rahimabad, Mau"
(hereinafter referred to as 'Madarsa') and also a Primary School known
as "Dalit Chetna Primary School, Meerpur, Rahimabad, Mau".
##PAGE2##The Madarsa in question was recognized on 15.6.2002 by the Registrar, Arbi Persian Examination, U.P. It is stated that in the year 2013, the State Government decided to include 146 Madarsas permanently recognized upto Alia level in the grant-in-aid list. In pursuance of the said decision, on 27.2.2013, a Government Order was issued including 71 Madarsas, out of the said 146 Madarsas in the list of Madarsas grant-in-
aid in first phase i.e. 2013-14.
It is further argued that initially the State Government had issued the list of 244 Madarsas which would be eligible for being brought under grant- in-aid, subject to they fulfilling the conditions. The name of the petitioner- Madarsa appeared at Serial No. 239 of the said list (Annexure 3 to the writ petition).
On 21.5.2013, the Government Order was issued providing cutoff dated i.e. 30.7.2013 by which date the application forms were to be filed by the said 246 Madarsas, if they fulfilled the condition.
The petitioner submitted the application on 20.6.2013 before the District Minority Welface Officer, Mau which was forwarded to the Registrar, U.P. Madarsa Education Board on the same day.
On 23.7.2015, a list of Madarsa was issued by the State Government bringing 75 Madarsas under grant-in-aid, despite the petitioner being eligible their names was rejected on hyper-technical grounds.
On account of the fact that technical objections were raised with regard to the consideration of the petitioner's institution, a correspondence took place in between the Government authorities and the petitioner which defect, according to the petitioner, was duly removed.
On 13.8.2015, the State Government issued another order to include 17 Madarsas in the list besides 71 Madarsas which were already included in the list on 27.2.2013. The petitioner claims to have removed all the defects as pointed out from time to time pertaining to the title of the property owned by the society, however, no decision was taken as such the petitioner approached this Court by filing Writ-C No. 63594 of 2015 (C/M Madarsa Islamia Safinatul Heday vs. State of U.P. and 3 others) which was disposed off by this Court on 20.11.2015. As no decision was taken and certain other queries were raised, the petitioner once again approached this Court by filing Writ-C No. 28933 of 2019 which was again disposed of vide orde