This contempt petition alleged non-compliance of a writ order directing the petitioner's reinstatement. The respondents justified the delay by citing a remittal of the underlying writ petition to a Single Bench by a Division Bench. The court found no ground for interference and disposed of the petition.
Petition allowed; Rule 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
S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 1472/2017
IN
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4309/2012
Manphool S/o Shri Ram Sahay Meena, aged about 40 years R/o Chhatriwali Dhani, Dausa, District Dausa (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents-contemnors
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mukesh Choudhary, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Mahrishi, A.A.G. with Mr. Samee Khan, Advocate
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA
Order
18/05/2022 :
Petitioner has filed this petition alleging therein that the order dated 25.03.2017 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4309/2012 titled as Manphool Vs. State of Rajasthan & Others, has not been complied with.
Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material made available on record.
Operative portion of order dated 25.03.2017 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, reads as under :-
(2 of 2)
[CCP-1472/2017]
“In view of observations made above, the verbal termination is quashed and set aside and the petitioner is directed to be reinstated in service with continuity of service and other consequential benefits, however, he shall not be entitled for actual back wages for the intervening period but shall be calculated notionally. The petitioner shall be allowed salary in the regular pay scale as observed in the aforesaid judgment. The compliance of this order be made by the respondents within a period of two months from the date of certified copy of this order is submitted in their office. The writ petition is accordingly allowed.”
In the reply submitted by the respondents, it has been averred that against the aforesaid order dated 25.03.2017 the respondents had preferred a Special Appeal (Writ) before the Division Bench. The Division Bench, vide its order dated 03.04.2018, allowed Special appeal (Writ) and remitted the matter to the Single Bench for fresh adjudication. Thus, there is no willful or deliberate non-compliance of the aforesaid order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court by the respondents.
In view of the reply submitted by the respondents, no ground for further interference is made out.
Petition stands disposed of accordingly. Rule is discharged.
(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J
ashok/11
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner has established willful non-compliance of the co-ordinate bench order dated 25.03.2017.
Manphool
State of Rajasthan
CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
