Jyoti Meena D/O S R Meena vs State Of Raj. (2023:Rj-Jp:27221)

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 5652 Raj/2
Judgement Date : 6 October, 2023

Rajasthan High Court
Jyoti Meena D/O S R Meena vs State Of Raj. (2023:Rj-Jp:27221) on 6 October, 2023
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
[2023:RJ-JP:27221]

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

               S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 579/2020

                                          In

                  S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.21601/2019

Jyoti Meena D/o S R Meena, Aged About 32 Years, R/o 542-B
Railway Officer Colony, Near Drm Office Rangpur Kota Rajasthan.
                                                                      ----Petitioner
                                      Versus
1.        State Of Raj., Through Its Principal Secretary, Local Self
          Government Department, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2.        Bhawani Singh Detha, Principal Secretary, Local Self
          Government Department, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
3.        Ujjwal Rathore, Director, Local Self Bodies, Government
          Of Rajasthan, Residency Road, Jaipur (Raj.)
4.        Arunesh Kumar Sharma, Commissioner, Nagar Parishad
          Bundi District Bundi (Raj.)
                                                                   ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajesh Sharma For Respondent(s) : Ms. Archana for Mr. Anil Mehta, AAG Mr. Nitin Sinsinwar HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL Judgment / Order 06/10/2023 Learned counsel for the respondents submits that no contempt is made out as the petitioner's services were never engaged by the respondents directly; but, through a placement agency. She submits that the S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.21601/2019 itself has been dismissed vide order dated 06.04.2022 and much before that, the interim order dated 19.12.2019, out of which the instant contempt petition arises, was (Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 08:34:29 PM) [2023:RJ-JP:27221] (2 of 2) [CCP-579/2020] also vacated by this Court vide order dated 26.08.2021 on the premise that the petitioner was never appointed by the respondents and he failed to implead her employer, the placement agency, as party-respondent in the writ petition. She submits that since the petitioner's services were never hired by them, they are not liable to pay any salary.

Learned counsel for the petitioner could not dispute that her services were hired through the placement agency and not by the respondents.

In view thereof, this Court is satisfied that no contempt is made out.

Resultantly, this contempt petition is dismissed. Notices are discharged.

(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J Sudha/107 (Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 08:34:29 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)