Dismissed

Himmata Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC5 Jan 2021WCP/781/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition in contempt proceedings filed for alleged disobedience. It found that the petitioners failed to submit a complete representation with details of encroachments as directed. Consequently, no contempt proceedings were initiated, and the petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings against respondents not initiated; petition dismissed with liberty to file appropriate representation.

Himmata Ram Vs State of Rajasthan — Contempt of Court | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

D.B. Writ Contempt No. 781/2020

¶3

Himmata Ram S/o Shri Megha Ram, Aged About 58 Years, R/o Muknasar, Punasar, Tehsil Osian, District Jodhpur.

¶4

Sukha Ram S/o Shri Shera Ram, Aged About 51 Years, R/o Muknasar, Punasar, Tehsil Osian, District Jodhpur.

¶5

Laxman Ram S/o Ugra Ram, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Muknasar, Punasar, Tehsil Osian, District Jodhpur.

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Devasthan, Jaipur.

¶9

Shri Inderjeet Singh, District Collector, Jodhpur

¶10

Shri Rajiv Sharma, Sub Divisional Officer, Lohawat, Jodhpur.

¶11

Shri Usman Khan, Tehsildar, Bapini, Jodhpur.

¶12

Shri Santosh Kumar Daga, Sarpanch , Gram Panchayat Punasar, District Jodhpur.

¶13

----Respondents

¶14

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jamwant Gurjar (Through VC)

¶15

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR VYAS

¶16

Order

¶17

05/01/2021

¶18

Vide order dated 26.11.19, the petitioners were directed to approach PLPC, Jodhpur, by filing representation for ventilating their grievance regarding alleged encroachments on the Doli land.

¶19

A perusal of the record reveals that the representation was made by the petitioners on 31.1.2020 to the District Collector, Jodhpur, however, the said representation even does not contain

¶20

(2 of 2)

¶21

[WCP-781/2020]

¶22

the complete details regarding encroachments made by the unscrupulous persons on the land forming part of the Doli land.

¶23

We are of the opinion that the petitioners have not submitted the representation to the PLPC, giving complete details and therefore, we are not inclined to initiate the contempt proceedings against the respondents for alleged disobedience of the order passed by this Court.

¶24

The contempt petition is therefore, dismissed.

¶25

The petitioners shall be at liberty to make an appropriate representation to the PLPC in terms of the directions issued by this Court vide order dated 26.11.19 passed in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17397/19.

¶26

(RAMESHWAR VYAS),J

¶27

(SANGEET LODHA),J

¶28

39-Vij/-

Himmata Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Himmata Ram v. State of Rajasthan

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

Sumitra Devi Vs Rajeshwar Singh

Bhartiya Tribal Party Rajasthan Vs State of Rajasthan

The Tantia University Vs the Union of India

Fusion Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Vs Devendra Bhushan Gupta

The State of Rajasthan Vs Mohd. Asalam

Mangi Lal Vs State