Dismissed

Rajmat Singh v. Shri Naveen Mahajan and Ors.

Rajasthan HC25 May 2018CCP/783/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order dismissing a civil contempt petition filed by a petitioner against respondents. The court held no contempt was made out as the petitioner utilized the liberty granted to make a representation which was duly considered and rejected by the respondents.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition dismissed and notice discharged; petitioner retained freedom of other legal remedies.

Rajmat Singh Vs Shri Naveen Mahajan and Ors. — Contempt of Court | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 783/2018

¶3

Rajmat Singh S/o Shri Ram Kishan Singh, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village Mosalpur, Gram Panchayat Mahamadpur, Post Tihariya, Tehsil Todabhim, District Karauli Raj

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Shri Naveen Mahajan Secretary Cum Commissioner, Rural Development And Pancgayti Raj Dfepartment Govt Of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur Raj

¶7

Shri Rajendra S, Makker Addl. Commisioner Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department Govt Of Rajasthan, Jaipur

¶8

Shri Rajat Kumar Mishra Principal Secretary, Public Health And Engineering Department Public Health And Engineering Department Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur Raj

¶9

Shri Surendra Maheshwari Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Karauli Raj

¶10

Ms. Rashmi Meena, Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Todabheem, District Karauli Raj

¶11

Shri Sarvat Singh Gurjar, Secretary, Gram Panchayat Mahamadpur, Panchayat Samiti, Todabhim, District Karauli Raj

¶12

State Of Rajasthan Through Its Principal Secretary Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur Raj

¶13

----Respondents

¶14

For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s)

¶15

: Mr. Rajmat Singh

¶16

: Mr. Nahar Singh Meena, Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Todabheem, District Karauli is present in person

¶17

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA

Order

25/05/2018

(2 of 3)

[CCP-783/2018]

The petitioner appears to have filed two writ petitions –

¶23

one bearing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No 18040/2017 and the other

¶24

bearing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18288/2017. Both the writ petitions were disposed of ex-parte vide orders dated 12.10.2017

¶25

and 13.10.2017. However, under both the orders, the

¶26

representation of the petitioner was to be considered by the respondents. The petitioner then made representation to the respondents in terms of the liberty granted by the Court. His representation has been considered and rejected vide order dated

¶27

22.5.2018.

¶28

Whatever the merits of the order, it cannot be subject

¶29

matter of address by this Court in this contempt petition.

¶30

Resultantly in the facts obtaining, the representation having been considered, albeit rejected, I find no contempt made out. Contempt petition is accordingly dismissed. Contempt notice stand discharged. However, as always, the petitioner shall be free to

¶31

take his remedies, as available in law, against the order rejecting

¶32

his representation.

¶33

(ALOK SHARMA),J

¶34

(3 of 3) [CCP-783/2018]

Rajmat Singh v. Shri Naveen Mahajan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajmat Singh v. Shri Naveen Mahajan 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

Suresh Kumar Vs Shri Dharmendra Kumar and Anr.

Girija Shankar Pareta and Ors. Vs State Medical and Health Ors.

Swastik House Leasing Ltd. Vs None

Subhita Kumari Vs Naresh Pal Gangwar and Ors.

Vikas Kumar and Anr. Vs Shri Naveen Mahajan and Ors.

Dr Hans Kumar Sharma Vs Smt Sreya Guha and Ors.