Dismissed

Smt. Asha Gupta D/O Shri Jyoti Swaroop Gupta, v. Shri Kamlesh Sharma (Transferred)

Rajasthan HC7 Oct 2025CMAP/125/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a civil miscellaneous application filed by a petitioner to recall a 2022 order disposing of a contempt petition. The Court held the application misconceived as the petitioner’s undertaking not to pursue the petition continued in operation without fresh cause of action.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed with cost of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited with the Litigants Welfare Fund.

Smt. Asha Gupta D/O Shri Jyoti Swaroop Gupta, Vs Shri Kamlesh Sharma (Transferred) — Rajasthan HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:40709]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 125/2025

¶4

¶5

S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No.1937/2018

¶6

Smt. Asha Gupta D/o Shri Jyoti Swaroop Gupta, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Flat No. 905-A, Krishna Nayan Apartment, Main Gautam Marg, Rani Sati Nagar, Nirman Nagar, Jaipur

¶7

----Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

Shri Kamlesh Sharma (Transferred), Earlier Served As Deputy Director, Secondary Education, Jaipur Zone Jaipur, Dr. Radha Krishna Shankul, Opposite Ots, Jln Marg, Jaipur.

¶10

Shri Mukesh Kumar Sharma (Transferred), Earlier As Deputy Director, Secondary Education, Jaipur Zone Jaipur, Dr. Radha Krishna Shankul, Opposite Ots, Jln Marg, Jaipur.

¶11

Shri Ratan Yadav, Presently Working Served As Deputy Director, Secondary Education, Jaipur Zone Jaipur, Dr. Radha Krishna Shankul, Opposite Ots, Jln Marg, Jaipurl.

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Raghu Nandan Sharma For Respondent(s) :

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

¶15

Order

¶16

07/10/2025

¶17

The instant civil misc. application has been filed by and on behalf of applicant-petitioner seeking to recall order dated 07.01.2022, whereunder the S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 1937/2018 was disposed of and to revive the contempt petition.

¶18

The contempt petition was filed by petitioner for noncompliance of the judgment dated 20.12.2013, which has been

[2025:RJ-JP:40709]

[CMAP-125/2025]

(2 of 3)

challenged by the respondents by way of filing S.B.C.W.P. No.12132/2014. In the writ petition, from the side of petitioner an undertaking was furnished on 14.05.2019, not to pursue the contempt petition.

¶23

Having perused the order dated 07.01.2022, it is amply clear that the contempt petition was disposed of in the light of undertaking submitted by the petitioner himself during writ proceedings, not to pursue the contempt petition for noncompliance of the judgment dated 20.12.2013 and simultaneously, liberty was granted to the petitioner to file a fresh contempt petition, after decision of the S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12132/2014. For ready reference, it would be apposite to reproduce the order dated 07.01.2022 herein:

¶24

“ This contempt petition has been filed, alleging noncompliance of the judgment dated 20.12.2013 passed by the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur in appeal No.1317/2012: Smt. Asha Gupta Vs State.

¶25

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the State has assailed the said judgment dated 20.12.2013 by way of filing SB Civil Writ Petition No.12132/2014 wherein the petitioner has also put in appearance and the writ petition has matured for hearing. It has been alleged by the respondents that the counsel for the petitioner has given an undertaking and made statement on 14.05.2019 that he will not pursue the contempt petition for non-compliance of the judgment dated 20.12.2013.

¶26

After perusal of the order sheet the writ petition No.12132/2014, it is clear that on 14.05.2019, the counsel appearing for the respondent(present petitioner), has stated that he will not pursue the contempt petition.

¶27

In view of above, at this stage until the writ petition is not decided, the respondents may not be assumed as guilty

[2025:RJ-JP:40709]

[CMAP-125/2025]

(3 of 3)

to face contempt proceedings as such there is no reason to keep the contempt petition pending, therefore, the contempt petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh contempt petition after decision of the writ petition No.12132/2014, if need so arises.

¶32

With the aforesaid liberty, the instant contempt petition is disposed of at this stage.”

¶33

Counsel for the petitioner admits that the undertaking of petitioner, furnished in the writ proceedings on 14.05.2019 is continuing in operation, though an application for withdrawal of undertaking has been filed but same is pending.

¶34

In view of the continuation of undertaking of petitioner, for not pursuing the contempt petition, the present application to revive the contempt petition is wholly misconceived and has been filed without any change in circumstances or without accrual of any fresh cause of action. Hence, instant the application has been filed in misuse of process of law and same is hereby dismissed with cost of Rs.10,000/-. The cost be deposited with the Litigants Welfare Fund through Banker’s Cheque/ DD in the name of Registrar General LWFA, Rajasthan High Court within a period of four weeks. Receipt of deposition of cost amount be placed in the file.

¶35

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

¶36

pcg/36

Smt. Asha Gupta D/O Shri Jyoti Swaroop Gupta, v. Shri Kamlesh Sharma (Transferred)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Asha Gupta D/O Shri Jyoti Swaroop Gupta, v. Shri Kamlesh Sharma (Transferred)

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

Jaisaram S/O Shri Kanaram, Vs Sohan S/O Noparam

Gayatri Devi W/O Late Kudeep Singh Vs Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited

Shahbaj S/O Intjar Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramprakash S/O Kalyan Prasad, Vs Ramswaroop @ Pappu Adopted Son Sh. Ranjeeta

Chandrashekhar @ Shriram Agarwal S/O Late Shri Bajranglal Agarwal Vs Assistant Commissioner Devasthan Department

Tejpal Choudhary Son of Shri Anandilal Vs State of Rajasthan