Dismissed

Gemara Ram v. H.S. Choudhary and Anr.

Rajasthan HC13 Aug 2019WCP/566/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt petition filed for non-compliance with an order directing the Forest Department to decide a promotion representation within one month, this Court noted that the representation was decided and adverse remarks were subsequently expunged, holding that no willful disobedience occurred.

What did the court decide?

The contempt petition is dismissed as there is no willful disobedience of the earlier order.

Gemara Ram Vs H.S. Choudhary and Anr. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Writ Contempt No. 566/2015

¶3

Gemara Ram S/o. Sh. Chetan Ramji Seju, aged 56 years, B/c Meghwal, Resident of Mahaveer Nagar, Barmer (Raj.)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan through the Secretary to the Government, Forest Department, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶7

Anil Kumar Goyal, Principal Secretary to the Government, Forest Department, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶8

Laxman Lal, Deputy Conservator of Forest, Leela Dhora, Barmer.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Punit Parihar For Respondent(s) : None present

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

¶12

Order

¶13

13/08/2019

¶14

The present Contempt Petition has been filed alleging the non-compliance of the order passed by this Court on 26.08.2014. This Court while disposing of the writ petition of the petitioner on 26.08.2014 passed following order :-

¶15

“Accordingly and in view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction and liberty to the petitioner to pursue his representation forwarded under letter dated 27.12.2013 to the respondent-Deputy Conservator of Forests, Barmer and the said authority is expected in law to decide the same, preferably after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, expeditiously, preferably within a period of one month and thereafter consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with law. ”

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

[WCP-566/2015]

¶18

The compliance report has been filed by the respondents, wherein they have stated that in pursuance of the direction issued by this Court, the representation of the petitioner has been decided vide order dated 12.09.2018 and the same has also been communicated to the petitioner.

¶19

The counsel for the petitioner submits that his case has not been considered for promotion despite the fact that adverse entries in the ACRs have been expunged.

¶20

In the considered view of this Court, since the representation of the petitioner has been decided and the adverse remarks in ACRs have been expunged. The consequences for considering the case of the petitioner for promotion shall follow.

¶21

In view of the order passed by the respondents, there is no willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court. Therefore, the order passed by this Court stands complied with the Contempt Petition is hereby dismissed. Notices are discharged.

¶22

However, it is open to the petitioner to take appropriate recourse for non-consideration of his case for promotion.

¶23

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

¶24

74-SunilS/-

Gemara Ram v. H.S. Choudhary and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gemara Ram v. H.S. Choudhary and Anr.

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

Nandlal and Anr. Vs Mahaveer Syanthtetics and Ors.

Nandlal Vs Mahaveer Synthetics and Ors.

Pappu Devi Vs State of Rajasthan

Nand Lal Meena Vs Rajeev S. Thakar and Ors.

Dinesh Kumar Choudhary and Anr. Vs Rajeev S. Thakar and Ors.

Shree Vidhi Sewa Samiti, Bhilwara Vs the State of Rajasthan