Rajendra Singh Panwar Vs Jay Prakash & Anr. (Uttarakhand High Court)
The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed a contempt petition alleging non-compliance with an earlier writ order directing CIBIL to decide the petitioner’s representation within three months. The Court noted that a previous contempt petition on the same issue had already been closed after the Chairman of CIBIL stated on affidavit that a decision had been taken. Since the same order and allegation were being raised again, and compliance had already been recorded, the Court found no reason to issue fresh notice and dismissed the contempt petition.
Read SC Judgment: Negative Credit Score Without Loan Triggers SC Probe into Bank Records
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Ms. Sheetal Selwal, Legal Aid Counsel for the petitioner.
2. This contempt petition has been filed, alleging wilful disobedience of the order dated 18.02.2020 passed by Writ Court in WPMS No. 3882 of 2019. By the said order, Credit Information Bureau of India Limited (CIBIL), Mumbai was directed to take decision on petitioner’s representation within three months.
3. Petitioner thereafter filed Contempt Petition No. 296 of 2020, alleging disobedience of the said order. The said Contempt Petition was closed, in view of the statement made by Mr. Mavila Vishwanathan Nair, Chairman (CIBIL) that decision on petitioner’s representation has been taken.
