PRAYAGRAJ, Dec. 28 -- The Allahabad high court has held that the highest officer in a government department will be liable for contempt proceedings against them if a writ court order is not complied with due to confusion in the administrative machinery. Holding that the UP chief secretary will be liable for contempt in cases relating to the Land Acquisition Act 1984 as well as the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013, the court said the distribution of work between the different departments of the state government cannot be used as a pretext to not implement the order of this court. It is the duty of the state government to ensure full compliance with the order passed by this court, the court added. "In case of any non-compliance because of any confusion in the administrative machinery of the state government regarding the department or officer who is responsible to ensure compliance would make the highest officer of the state responsible and liable in contempt," said Justice Salil Kumar Rai. In the present contempt case, petitioner Vinay Kumar Singh's land was acquired in 1977. Accordingly, the award for compensation was passed in 1982 and 1984. However, no compensation was paid. After the commencement of the 2013 Act, the compensation was deposited in the government treasury but the petitioner refused to accept the same. The petitioner contended that since the acquisition proceedings had lapsed in terms of section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, he had represented before the authority to release the plots to him. However, no action was taken. Accordingly, the petitioner filed a writ petition and the writ court held the acquisition proceedings to have lapsed since the deposit made was not proper. Since the plots were not reverted to the petitioner despite the order of the writ court, it filed a contempt application wherein time was granted to the officers to comply. However, when no compliance was made, the petitioner preferred a second contempt application. The land was initially acquired by the irrigation department but was later transferred to the department of urban development, UP, Lucknow. Accordingly, the principal secretary of the department was impleaded in the contempt application. Despite giving assurance to the court, the order was not complied with. Observing that all tricks were employed by the state to prevent implementation of the order of the writ court, the court held that a case for wilful disobedience was made out. Noting that the highest authority in land acquisition matters was the chief secretary, the court gave him one month time to comply with the order of the writ court or be present before the high court on the next date for framing of charges. In its order dated November 28, the court directed to list this case on January 5, 2026....