The bench held that the State Government complied with directions regarding regularization of service based on Uma Devi's case criteria via a 2009 notification. Finding no further justification, the court discharged the contempt notices and dismissed the petitions.
Contempt notices were discharged and all four contempt petitions were dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
-1-
D.B.Civil Contempt Petition Nos.496/12, 460/12, 461/12 & 466/12.
1. D.B.Civil Contempt Petition No.496/2012. Smt.Shanti Devi. VERSUS Shri T.Ravikant & Another.
2. D.B.Civil Contempt Petition No.460/2012. Rakesh Dilawar. VERSUS Shri T.Ravikant & Another.
3. D.B.Civil Contempt Petition No.461/2012. Nand Kishore Nayak. VERSUS Shri T.Ravikant & Another.
4. D.B.Civil Contempt Petition No.466/2012. Satyanarayan Saini. VERSUS Shri T.Ravikant & Another.
09.12.2014.
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE J.K.RANKA
Mr.N.K.Bhatt ] Counsel for petitioners. Mr.P.K.Sharma ]
Mr.Anurag Sharma, Addl.Advocate General for respondents. *****
All the four contempt petitions have been filed for noncompliance of certain directions of this court passed while disposing of the bunch of appeals vide order dt.20.07.2011.
It can be noticed by this court that while disposing of the special appeals, this court finally observed that the circular dt.13.01.2003 may be taken note of and keeping in view the parameters and criteria laid down in Uma Devi's case, such of the incumbents, who are covered under the scheme, may be considered for regularization on the post held by them.
It appears from the record that the amendment notification dt.27.02.2009 issued by the Government in exercise of powers conferred under the proviso to Art.309 of the Constitution making necessary amendments in the Rajasthan Class-IV Service (Recruitment and Other Service Conditions) Rules, 1999, keeping in view the observations made by the Apex Court in Uma Devi's case and para-53 in particular and obviously the candidature of the
-2-
D.B.Civil Contempt Petition Nos.496/12, 460/12, 461/12 & 466/12.
daily wagers including present appellants is to be considered in terms of the amendment notification dt.27.02.2009 and this what
this court also observed while disposing of the bunch of appeals vide order dt.20.07.2011 to consider the candidature of the appellants for regularization of service keeping in view the parameters and criteria laid down by the Apex Court in Uma Devi's case and it appears that the present notification dt.27.02.2009 was not brought to the notice of the court.
It is also brought to notice of the court that candidature of each of the incumbent was considered and appropriate orders have been passed by the competent authority and that being so, in our considered view, nothing remains further to be complied with by the State Government and once compliance has been made in its true spirit, there appears no justification to continue with the contempt proceedings any further.
Consequently, the contempt notices stands discharged and all
the contempt petitions are accordingly dismissed.
(J.K.RANKA),J. (AJAY RASTOGI),J.
All corrections made in judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed. Solanki DS, Sr.P.A.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether to continue contempt proceedings for non-compliance of directions regarding regularization of service as per Uma Devi's case parameters.
Whether the State Government has complied in the true spirit with the directions to consider candidates under the amendment notification dt.27.02.2009.
Whether the contempt notices against petitioners should be discharged given the completion of compliance by the competent authority.
Smt.Shanti Devi
Rakesh Dilawar
Nand Kishore Nayak
Satyanarayan Saini
Shri T.Ravikant
AJAY RASTOGI
J.K.RANKA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
