Contempt petition alleging non-compliance with a previous order. Court found petitioner's representation was considered by State, and petition was disposed of.
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. 2660/2018
In
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11786/2016
Sunil Kumar S/o Ramesh Chand, aged about 24 Years, R/o Bada Mohalla Harijan Basti Gangapurcity District Sawai Madhopur (Raj)
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA
Order
17/05/2022 :
Petitioner has filed this petition alleging therein that the order dated 31.05.2018 passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11786/2018 titled as Sunil Kumar 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.
On 31.05.2018 Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, had passed
the following order :-
(2 of 2)
[CCP-2660/2018]
“At the very outset, representative of the petitioner submits that at this stage, the petitioner would be satisfied, if the State respondents are directed to consider and decide the representation within a time frame, which the petitioner is ready and willing to address within two weeks hereinafter.
In view of the limited prayer addressed; the instant writ proceedings are closed with a direction to the petitioner to address a comprehensive representation to the respondents ventilating grievances raised herein.
In case, a representation is so addressed within the aforesaid period, the State-respondents are directed to consider and decide the same by a reasoned and speaking order as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. However, in no case later than six weeks from the date of receipt of the representation along with a certified copy of this order.
With the observations and directions, as indicated above, the writ application stands disposed off. “
In the reply submitted by the State, it has been averred that
in compliance of the directions issued by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 31.05.2018, the representation of the petitioner has already been considered and decided by a reasoned and speaking order.
In view of the reply submitted by the State, no ground for further interference is made out.
Petition stands disposed of accordingly. Rule is discharged.
(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J
ashok/82
Sunil Kumar
State of Rajasthan
Chandra Kumar Songara
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
