Dismissed

Babu Lal Gurjar S/O Sh. Revad Mal v. Smt. Anandi (Ias) Principal

Rajasthan HC25 Apr 2024CCP/934/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a contempt petition regarding alleged non-compliance with directions on illegal mining. The Court found the inquiry held and an order passed, noting no specific violation, and dismissed the petition, though the underlying writ was not a PIL.

What did the court decide?

The contempt petition was disposed of; no specific order was made against the respondents as no case was made out for contempt.

Babu Lal Gurjar S/O Sh. Revad Mal Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:19456-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 934/2023

¶4

Babu Lal Gurjar S/o Sh. Revad Mal, R/o Village Benada Th. Bassi, Distt. Jaipur,

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Smt. Anandi (Ias) Principal, Secretary, State Of Rajasthan, Department Of Mines, Geology, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶8

Bhagwati Prasad Kalal, Director, Mines And Geology Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Udaipur.

¶9

Arivind Kumar, Regional Officer, Jaipur South, Rajasthan Pollution Control Board, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur

¶10

Arivind Kumar, Regional Officer, Jaipur South, Rajasthan Pollution Control Board, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur

¶11

State Of Rajasthan, Principal, Secretary, Department Of Mines, Geology, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prem Shanker Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bharat Vyas, AAG Ms. Niti Jain Mr. Kapil Vyas

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL

¶15

Order

¶16

25/04/2024

¶17

AVNEESH JHINGAN, J (ORAL):-

¶18

This contempt petition is filed pleading non-compliance of directions issued by this Court on 07.05.2022 passed in DBCWP No.10519/2021.

¶19

The operational part of the order is reproduced below:-

¶20

(2 of 3)

¶21

[2024:RJ-JP:19456-DB]

¶22

[CCP-934/2023]

¶23

“We are disposing off the petition without issuing notice to private-respondents. Without commenting upon the complaint regarding illegal mining, since complaint has been made to the authorities, we direct inquiry to the made. All the parties including respondents no.5 to 12 shall be afforded opportunity of hearing by the authority while making such inquiry before taking final decision in the matter.

¶24

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed off. All pending application stand disposed off.”

¶25

The grievance raised by the counsel for the petitioner is that the respondents have done half baked enquiry with regard to the illegal mining. The entire illegal mining being carried in the area was not acted against.

¶26

Learned Senior Counsel for the respondents raises a preliminary objection that the petitioner was not a party in the writ petition and hence the contempt petition is not maintainable. It is further argued that the directions of the Court were complied with. The papers relating to the enquiry had been annexed with the reply and pursuant thereto order dated 01.08.2023 was passed.

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ of Public Interest Litigation was filed and petitioner is not a stranger to the cause of action agitated in the petition.

¶28

From perusal of the order passed by this Court on 07.05.2022 it is evident that writ petition was not registered as a Public Interest Litigation. Further that the petitioner was not arrayed as party in the writ petition. Be that as it may, the petition

¶29

(3 of 3)

¶30

[2024:RJ-JP:19456-DB]

¶31

[CCP-934/2023]

¶32

was disposed of without issuing notice to the private respondents or commenting upon the contents of the complaint.

¶33

The respondents were directed to hold an enquiry on the allegations made in the complaint and to pass an order after providing an opportunity of hearing to the respondents No.5 to 12 (arrayed in the petition). From pleadings, it is evident that the enquiry was held and an order has been passed. Hence, no case is made out for initiation of contempt proceedings. The petition is disposed of.

¶34

The petitioner shall be at liberty to avail remedies in accordance with law if aggrieved of the order passed.

(BHUWAN GOYAL),J

(AVNEESH JHINGAN),J

Anu /Chandan/34

Reportable: No

Babu Lal Gurjar S/O Sh. Revad Mal v. Smt. Anandi (Ias) Principal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babu Lal Gurjar S/O Sh. Revad Mal v. Smt. Anandi (Ias) Principal

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

Goverdhan Das Maheshwari, S/O Late Shri Gopal Lal Maheshwari Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income- Tax

Smt Ganpati Devi Khetan Andanr Vs the Assistan Director Land Andb

Subhash Chand Tyagi and Anr. Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Kalyan Sahai Dhakad Son of Late Murlidhar Vs Shri Jitendra Soni

Nathu Singh S/O Shri Phool Singh, Vs Shri Sudhansh Pant Chief Secretary

Shree Shakuntala Industries Vs Union of India and Ors.