Dismissed
Darshan Bala Khatri v. Mrs Veenu Gupta and Others
Rajasthan HCCCP/85/2013
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
PETITION NO.85/2013 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF…
What the court decided
AI extract
PETITION NO.85/2013 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF…
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.
S.B. CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.85/2013
(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR
O R D E R IN S.B. CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.85/2013 IN S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5950/2009 (Darshan Bala Khatri Vs. Smt. Veenu Gupta & Ors.)
Date of Order : 09.09.2014
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA
None present for the petitioner. Mr. Lokesh Katara, OIC, for the respondents. BY THE COURT
Non-compliance with the order 18.05.2009, passed by this in SBCWP No.5950/2009, has been alleged in this contempt petition. Thereunder this Court had disposed of a bunch of writ petitions including one filed by the petitioner with certain directions. The petitioner appears to have made a representation for enforcement of the directions of this Court to his benefit.
Reply to the contempt petition has been filed. It has been submitted that the case of the petitioner was considered in the context of the order dated 18.05.2009, passed by this Court in SBCWP No.5950/2009 (Yogayta Israni & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.). It was however found that the petitioner was untrained as on 18.05.2009 and had proceeded to Jammu University on 16.04.2009 to undertake a B.Ed. Course. Yet in compliance with the order dated 18.05.2009, the petitioner was reemployed as Vidhyarthi Mitra on 01.07.2009, but discontinued on her own will effective 31.07.2009. The unauthorised absence of
S.B. CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.85/2013
(2)
the petitioner entailed detriment to the teaching of the students consequent to which she was issued notices on 03.08.2009 and 07.08.2009. Notices were not replied too, nor the petitioner appeared before the authorities in the concerned school. Thereafter as on 10.08.2009 all sanctioned posts have been filled up by regularly selected teachers. Earlier contempt petition filed by the petitioner bearing No.1070/2009 was dismissed by the Court on 17.05.2011. It has been then submitted that earlier the petitioner was untrained and even during her employment was prone to unauthorised absence and it was in the circumstances, not desirable to engage her as Vidharthi Mitra. Consequently, vide order dated 30.09.2013 the petitioner's representation has been rejected.
The order dated 30.09.2013 rejecting the petitioner's representation is a detailed and speaking order. The order cannot be dissected or analysed in this contempt petition. It is not palpably mala fide or perverse or suffering a pre-determined mind.
Aside of the aforesaid, Mr. Lokesh Katara, OIC appearing for the petitioner submitted that presently no Vidhyarthi Mitras are engaged in the State of Rajasthan.
In the overall facts of the case, I find on force in the contempt petition.
Contempt petition is Dismissed. Notices discharged.
MS/- All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.- Manoj Solanki, P.A.
(ALOK SHARMA), J
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the order rejecting the petitioner's representation should be set aside despite being a speaking order.
Darshan Bala Khatri
Smt. Veenu Gupta
Allok Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court