Dismissed

Ravi Dutt v. Nisha Singh and Ors.

Himachal Pradesh HC3 Jun 2022COPC/139/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petitioner filed a Contempt Petition under Article 215 of the Constitution and the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 against government officials for alleged non-compliance with a judgment dismissing his appointment petition. The Court held the petition misconceived as no mandamus had been issued.

What did the court decide?

Notice stands discharged and the petitioner is advised not to file such misconceived petitions.

Ravi Dutt Vs Nisha Singh and Ors. — Contempt of Court | Himachal Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

ON THE 3^rd DAY OF JUNE, 2022

¶3

BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL CIVIL ORIGINAL PETITION CONTEMPT No.139 of 2022

¶4

Between:

¶5

RAVI DUTT S/O SH. CHET RAM, R/O VILLAGE JILLOH, P.O. DREKDI, TEHSIL SALOONI, DISTRICT CHAMBA, H.P.

¶6

….PETITIONER.

¶7

(BY MR. RAJESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

¶8

AND

¶9

1. SMT. NISHA SINGH, ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY (PACHAYATI RAJ), GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. 2. SH. RUGVED MILIND THAKUR, DIRECTOR (PANCHAYATI RAJ), GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH. 3. SWATI GUPTA, SUBDIVISIONAL OFFICER (CIVIL) SALOONI, DISTRICT CHAMBA, H.P. 4. NISHI MAHAJAN, BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

¶10

¶11

SALOONI, DISTRICT CHAMBA, H.P.

¶12

….RESPONDENTS.

¶13

(BY. MR. DINESH THAKUR, MR. SUMESH RAJ AND MR. SANJEEV SOOD, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATES GENERAL, WITH MR. MANOJ BAGGA, ASSISTANT ADVOCATE GENERAL )

¶14

Whether approved for reporting ?¹ No

¶15

This petition coming on for admission this day, the Court passed the following: O R D E R

¶16

This Contempt Petition filed under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, calls for taking action against the respondents impleaded therein, for violating the judgment passed by this Court in CWPOA No.255 of 2019, dated 19.08.2022, affirmed by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in LPA No.56 of 2020, dated 15.12.2020.

¶17

A perusal of the said judgments demonstrates that vide order dated 19.08.2022, passed in CWPOA No.255 of 2019, the Court had dismissed the petition which was preferred by the petitioner against the order passed by the authorities, holding appointment of the petitioner therein as Panchayat Sahayak to be

¶18

¶19

¶20

bad in law. The appeal which was preferred by the said petitioner, namely, Bihari Lal, before the Hon’ble Division Bench met the same fate. In other words, there was no mandamus issued by the Court in the said matter, non-compliance of which could be said to have had resulted into any disobedience on the part of the respondents.

¶21

The petition, therefore, apparently is misconceived and the same is accordingly dismissed. and the petitioner is well advised not to indulge in the filing of such misconceived petitions in future. Notice stands discharged.

¶22

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge

¶23

June 03, 2022 (Rishi)

Ravi Dutt v. Nisha Singh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Dutt v. Nisha Singh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Simro Devi Vs State of Hp

Raman Kumar Vs State of Hp and Others

Khoob Singh Vs State of Hp

Prakash Chand Now Deceased through Lrs Rakesh Chand Vs Kartar Singh

Ranbir Singh Vs Sandeep Managing Director of Hrtc and Others

Vidya Sagar Vs Hrtc and Others