The Court disposed of a contempt petition filed alleging non-compliance with an interim order staying construction adjacent to a Defence Area. Petitioners sought to withdraw the petition. The Court allowed withdrawal and discharged the rule.
Permission granted to withdraw the petition; rule stands discharged.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 1667/2019
In
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9389/2019
----Petitioners
Versus
----Respondents
(2 of 3)
[CCP-1667/2019]
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
Order
24/02/2020
We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
On 11.02.2020 following order was passed by this Court:-
“ [Civil Co ntempt Petition No. 1667/2019]
This contempt petition has been filed by the petitioners alleging disobedience of the interim order dated 28th of May 2019 passed by this Court in D.B.C.W.P. No.9389/2019. The operative portion whereof reads as under: -
“Issue notice, returnable by eight weeks. In the meantime, the operation of order dated 12.06.2017 (Annexure-4) shall remain stayed. It is further directed that no building shall be allowed to be constructed/raised in the vicinity of the Defence Area in Jaipur except on issuance of NoC in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Government of India on 18.5.2011 and the status quo with regard to the construction being raised by respondent no.4 adjacent to the Army Area, situated on plot no.A-51, Ganesh Colony, Chatrapati Shivaji Grah Nirman Sahakari Samiti, Near Jaipur Military Station, Jaipur shall be maintained by the parties.”
Learned Additional Solicitor General while drawing attention of this Court to the photographs of the building under construction, at different stages, demonstrated that defying the directions of this Court, the construction of building was continued by fourth respondent, Smt. Kitabo Devi Malik, with the tacit support of the authorities of Jaipur Municipal Corporation and Jaipur Development Authority, Jaipur.
It is submitted that in view of unequivocal directions issued by this Court, the respondent authorities were under obligation to ensure that no further
(3 of 3)
[CCP-1667/2019]
construction is raised and the status quo, as was existing on the date of passing of the interim order by this Court, is maintained, however, they deliberately so as to extend undue favour to fourth respondent, permitted the construction to be raised and consequently construction of building, which was incomplete at the time of passing of interim order, has now been completed.
Issue notice to respondents No.2, 3 and 4 to show cause as why they may not be punished for willful and deliberate disobedience of the order passed by this Court.
The respondents No.2 and 3 are directed to seize the building constructed by the fourth respondent forthwith. The building shall not be released from the seizure without permission of this Court. The report regarding seizure of the building shall be submitted before this Court before the next date of hearing.
List the matter on 24.02.2020 alongwith DBCWP No.9389/2019.
[Civil Writ Petition No. 9389/2019]
List the matter alongwith D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No.1667/2019.”
Learned State Counsel has submitted that action has been taken by issuing notices to the flat owners/occupiers. 12 flats have been seized and to 6 flats’ occupiers, notices have been issued for vacation of the flats. Process of demolition has already been initiated.
Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that he may be permitted to withdraw the petition at this stage.
Ordered accordingly.
Rule Stands discharged.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J
Jatin/Gourav /17
(SABINA),J
1 issue framed by the court
Whether warrant for contempt proceedings should be issued for alleged disobedience of interim order regarding construction stay.
Union Of India
State Of Rajasthan
T. Ravikanth
Vijaypal Singh
Kitabo Devi Malik
Sabina
Narendra Singh Dhaddha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
