Anil Kumar Sharma S/O Shri Hari ... vs Shri Naresh Pal Gangwar Principle ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 1427 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

         D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 2382/2018
                                        In
            D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 882/2017

Anil Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Hari Narayan Sharma, Aged About
48 Years, R/o Gupteshwar Road Kaushal Sadan Dausa (Raj)
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1.      Shri Naresh Pal Gangwar, Principle Secretary Department
        Of Education, Govt. Of Rajasthan Govt. Secretariat Jaipur
        (Raj)
2.      Shri Nathmal Didel Director Secondary Education, Govt.
        Of Rajasthan Bikaner (Raj)
3.      Shri Yogesh Kumar Sharma District Education Officer
        Secondary Education, Dausa Rajasthan
4.      State   Of     Rajasthan          Through          Principle   Secretary
        Department Of Education, Govt. Of Raj. Government
        Secretariat Jaipur (Raj)
5.      Shri R. Venkateshwaran, Principle Secretary, Department
        of Education, Government of Rajasthan, Government
        Secretariat, Jaipur Rajasthan.
                                                                 ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Himanshu Jain, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ganesh Meena, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Bhanu Sharma, Advocate Mr. Rahul Sehra, Advocate

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR VYAS Judgment / Order

09/02/2021

Petitioner has filed the contempt petition alleging willful non-

compliance of the order dated 30.10.2017 by the respondents.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone

through the record available on the file carefully.

                                                                             (2 of 2)                  [CCP-2382/2018]



                                          Petitioner   had   filed    the     writ     petition     challenging   his

termination order and the writ petition filed by the petitioner was

partially allowed vide order dated 10.04.2017. Petitioner preferred

an appeal against the order passed by the learned Single Judge

and the appeal filed by the petitioner was allowed and the order

dated 10.02.2012, whereby, petitioner was terminated from

service, was set aside and it was ordered that he be reinstated in

service with full consequential benefits. The said order was

upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It is the case of the

petitioner that the order passed in appeal filed by the petitioner

had not been complied with.

In reply to the petition, it has been submitted by the

respondents that the order passed by this Court has been duly

complied. Petitioner has been sanctioned ACP on completion of 9

years of his service as well as ACP on completion of 18 years of

service. Petitioner has been paid Rs.27,19,284/- towards arrears

of salary etc. after fixation of his pay. He has been allowed to join

duty vide order dated 16.06.2017.

Thus, in view of the reply submitted by the respondents, no

ground for further interference is made out.

Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

Rule stands discharged.

However, it is clarified that petitioner would be at liberty to

seek appropriate remedy as per law, in case, he feels that some

benefits which were due towards him, had not been granted.

                                    (MANOJ KUMAR VYAS),J                                              (SABINA),J

                                   Mohita /46









Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)