This bench dismissed a contempt petition alleging non-compliance with an interim order regarding pasture land encroachment because the earlier order lacked a specific time-line for compliance.
The contempt petition was dismissed as the order dated 15.05.2024 was not flouted due to lack of time-line.
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.
[2024:RJ-JP:42868-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 916/2024
Satveer Son Of Harphool Singh, Aged About 36 Years, Resident Of Vill.-Badhadhar, Tehsil-Sikar, District-Sikar (Raj.) Mobile - 9462057085, Pan No. Bqnps7917L [email protected]
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Babu Lal Nasuna For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL
Order
10/10/2024
The petitioner has filed this contempt petition alleging the contempt of order dated 15.05.2024 passed by Division Bench of this Court.
It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that there is encroachment on pasture land and the same has not been removed.
We have perused the order dated 15.05.2024.
(2 of 2) [CCP-916/2024]
[2024:RJ-JP:42868-DB]
The operative portion of the order reads as under:-
“From the steps which have been so far taken by the revenue authorities, it cannot be said that the authorities are not taking any action. The Collector has also directed the Land Records Officer and it is instructed that the demarcation and spot inspection would be carried out as early as possible. The enquiry on the complaint with regard to encroachment shall be brought to the logical conclusion one way or other.”
We are of the considered view that since no time line was provided in the order dated 15.05.2024, the respondents cannot be said to have committed any willful disobedience of said order.
Consequently, we do not find any force in the contempt petition and the same is accordingly dismissed.
The petitioner is free to avail the remedy available in accordance with law.
(BHUWAN GOYAL),J
(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J
Anu /9
2 issues framed by the court
Whether failure to provide a time-line in an earlier interim order constitutes willful disobedience warranting contempt.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to relief in a contempt petition for alleged non-compliance without a specific deadline.
Satveer Son Of Harphool Singh
Qamar Ul Zaman Chaudhary
Kunal Rar
Babu Lal Bijarnia
Shivdayal
Sushila Kulhari
Pankaj Bhandari
Bhuvan Goyal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
