Dismissed

Lal Bahadur Meena v. C.S. Rajan and Ors.

Rajasthan HC12 Feb 2016WCP/185/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No.185/15, holding that the respondents complied with the order by considering the petitioner's regularization case, the court dropped the contempt proceedings and discharged the notices, leaving the petitioner free to approach the appropriate remedy against the rejection.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings are dropped and notices are discharged. Petitioner may approach appropriate remedy regarding rejection of regularization claim.

Lal Bahadur Meena Vs C.S. Rajan and Ors. — Contempt of Court | Rajasthan HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

Lal Bahadur Meena Vs. Shri C.S. Rajan & Ors. (S. B. CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.185/15)

¶3

Date of Order : 12.2.16

¶4

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA

¶5

Mr. D.S. Sodha, for the petitioner. Mr. Manish Patel, Additional Government Counsel, for the respondents-contemnors.

¶6

This contempt petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging disobedience of the order dated 15.4.14 passed in SB Civil Writ Petition No.2154/07, the operative portion whereof reads as under :

¶7

“In view of the above, while following the aforesaid judgment, it is held that due to malafide reason, the decision was taken to remove the petitioners from service, therefore, the writ petitions are allowed, the order of termination dt. 14.12.2006 is hereby set aside. The petitioners are in service in pursuance of the interim order passed by this Court, therefore, the respondents are directed to consider their cases for regularization on the post of Handpump Mistry as per the directions given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in para 53 of the judgment in Uma Devi (supra) within a period of three months from the date of receiving certified copy of this order. A copy of this order be also placed in all the files.”

¶8

¶9

It is not disputed before this Court by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner has already been reinstated in service.

¶10

The respondents have filed an additional reply to the contempt petition taking the stand that in terms of the directions issued by this Court, the case of the petitioner for regularization on the post of Handpump Mistry has been considered by the District Establishment Committee on 10.2.16 and after due consideration, the claim of the petitioner for regularization stands rejected. A copy of order issued pursuant to the decision of the District Establishment Committee is also placed on record.

¶11

In the considered opinion of this Court, the case of the petitioner having been considered by the respondents, the order disobedience whereof is alleged in the contempt petition stands substantially complied with and therefore, no fruitful purpose will be served in continuing with the contempt proceedings any further.

¶12

Accordingly, the contempt proceedings are dropped. Notices are discharged. Needless to say that the petitioner is at liberty to question the legality of the decision of the District Establishment Committee by availing appropriate remedy available under the law.

¶13

(SANGEET LODHA), J.

¶14

vij 37

Lal Bahadur Meena v. C.S. Rajan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lal Bahadur Meena v. C.S. Rajan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yaswant Purbiya and Anr. Vs State and Ors.

Mahendra Singh Baroka and Ors. Vs State and Ors.

Hemant Kumar Meena and Anr. Vs State and Ors.

Bhavana Kumari and Anr. Vs State and Ors.

Anda Ram and Ors. Vs State and Ors.

Kartarsingh and Ors. Vs State and Ors.