Disposed

Suman Kumari v. Shr Rakesh Sharma and Ors.

Rajasthan HC17 Feb 2018CCP/157/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that the officer who willfully disobeyed the High Court's order to allow the petitioner to join service is guilty of contempt. The Court directed that the petitioner's salary for the delay period must be paid by the Government and recovered from the disobedient officer's salary, while also recommending disciplinary action.

What did the court decide?

Salary for the intervening period granted to the petitioner; recoverable from the contemnor officer's salary. Disciplinary action directed.

Suman Kumari Vs Shr Rakesh Sharma and Ors. — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 157 / 2018

¶3

Suman Kumari W/o Shri Anil Godara B/c Jat (OBC), Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village Brahmano Ki Dhani, Post Bigodana, Chirawa, Distt. Jhunjhunu (Raj.) At Present Working on the Post of ANM At Under CHC Bagad Distt. Jhunjhunu.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Shri Rakesh Sharma, Additional Director (Adm.), Medical & Health Service, Rajasthan, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur

¶7

Shri Subhash Kholia, Chief Medical & Health Officer, Jhunjhunu

¶8

State of Rajasthan Through Additional Director (Adm.), Medical & Health Service, Rajasthan, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, Jaipur

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sajay Mehla

¶11

For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.K. Gupta, AAG

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA Order

¶13

17/02/2018

¶14

After hearing on 16^th February, 2018, this court noted that in compliance of the order dated 20^th December, 2017, the petitioner has been allowed to join on 14^th February, 2018. The concerned officer was directed to remain present in court along with the concerned order of joining.

¶15

Mr. Rakesh Sharma, Additional Director (Administration) Medical and Health Service, Rajasthan, Jaipur, is present in court and he has placed before this court the order dated 12^th February, 2018, issued by him wherein it is mentioned that since the contempt petition is pending before this court, the order of the

¶16

(2 of 4)

¶17

[CCP-157/2018]

¶18

High Court dated 20^th December, 2017, is directed to be implemented immediately. The concerned officer states that because there are several cases wherein the High Court passed the order of staying the operation of the order of the transfer decision was to be taken in all cases and therefore, the order of this court was not implemented earlier. On specific query being made as to whether he has taken any legal advice before not implementing the court’s order, he has stated that he had not taken any legal advice and the decision was taken at its own level. Mr. S.K. Gupta, Learned AAG, who is appearing in this contempt matter, has candidly submitted that no legal advice was taken for not implementing the Court’s order.

¶19

The officer-contemnor is of RAS rank and he is holding the post of Additional Director (Administration) Medical and Health Service, Rajasthan, Jaipur and is supposed to know that court’s orders are required to be complied with. His action of taking such a decision as aforesaid is clearly in violation of the court’s order which amounts to override the process of the court. It cannot be doubted that this court’s order have to be implemented and it should be implemented without any ifs and buts. Of course, remedy is always available to the aggrieved to challenge the same in appeal. However, it is an admitted position that till date no appeal has been filed against the order before the Division Bench.

¶20

There is another aspect which needs to be taken note of, as pointed out, is that while the order was passed on 20^th December, 2017 staying and quashing the transfer order dated 15^th September, 2017 and the concerned petitioner submitting his

¶21

(3 of 4)

¶22

[CCP-157/2018]

¶23

joining report on 22^nd December, 2017, with the copy of the order; he was not allowed to join and now the petitioner has been allowed to join only on 14^th February, 2017.

¶24

In this case, it is on 14^th February, 2017, i.e. period of more than one month and almost 22 days the petitioner has not joined anywhere and the question would arise relating to her salary for the intervening period. The contemnor while issuing the order of compliance in these proceedings, dated 12^th February, 2017, as noted above, does not deal with the aspect of the matter. The question would however arise from which head the amount of salary shall be released as there is no attendance of the petitioner for the intervening period. The contemnor, Additional Director, states that the salary shall be paid from their salary head and if that is so, this court finds that the amount of salary shall be released to the petitioner without his having performed any duty. The petitioner was ready to perform his duty but because of the action of the contempnor in taking decision not to comply with the court’s order, the petitioner was prevented to perform. The salary has to be paid to the concerned petitioner. Therefore, the State exchequer cannot be burdened with the salary for this intervening period as it was on account of personal decision of the contemnor who is present in the court.

¶25

In the circumstances, this court is satisfied that the respondent Mr. Rakesh Sharma has flouted deliberately and willfully orders of the court while holding the contemnor guilty of having committing contempt of court within meaning of Section 2 (f) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, instead of punishing him,

¶26

(4 of 4)

¶27

[CCP-157/2018]

¶28

it is directed that the salary of the petitioner in the present contempt petition shall be released to him for the intervening period and the same shall be recovered by Government from the salary of the contemnor officer i.e. Additional Director (Administration) Medical and Health Service, Mr. Rakesh Sharma.

¶29

Copy of this order shall be sent to the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Rajasthan, Secretariat, who is also directed to additionally take appropriate disciplinary action against the officer above for sitting over court’s orders and not making compliance of the court’s order within time. The contemnor is further warned to remain careful in future.

¶30

With the aforesaid observations, the contempt petition is

¶31

disposed of as above.

¶32

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA)J.

¶33

MohitR174

Suman Kumari v. Shr Rakesh Sharma and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suman Kumari v. Shr Rakesh Sharma 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

Jeetu Singh Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Amarsingh Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

State of Rajasthan Vs Mohammed Zakir

Sammi Kha Vs Juharbi and Others

Arif Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Mahendra Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp