Dr. Surendra Singh Choudhary vs Shri Rohit Kumar Singh, Ias
2022 Latest Caselaw 10219 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JODHPUR

S.B. Writ Contempt No. 16/2020

Dr. Surendra Singh Choudhary

----Petitioner Versus Shri Rohit Kumar Singh, Ias

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Yash Pal Khileree For Respondent(s) : Mr. K. S. Rajpurohit, AAG with Mr. Rajat Arora

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

Judgment / Order

04/08/2022

This Court vide order dated 28.07.2022, taking into

consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, has

observed that prima facie, the affidavit filed by Dr. K. K. Sharma in

support of the reply to the contempt petition is false. This Court

has directed Mr. K. S. Rajpurohit, learned AAG to instruct Dr. K. K.

Sharma to remain personally present before this Court today.

Mr. Rajpurohit, learned AAG has submitted an application,

supported by affidavit of Dr. K. K. Sharma, seeking exemption of

his personal presence before this Court today on the ground that

he is suffering from Pyrexia with vertigo and is advised for

complete bed rest till 5 th August, 2022. In the said application,

explanation regarding the affidavit filed by Dr. K. K. Sharma in

support of the contempt petition has also been given. It is stated

in the affidavit that at the time of filing of the affidavit, a

disciplinary enquiry was contemplated against the petitioner,

(2 of 3) [WCP-16/2020]

however, later on, the Department of Personnel vide order dated

25.01.2022 has refused to grant permission to initiate disciplinary

proceedings against the petitioner.

In the application, it is averred by Dr. K. K. Sharma that at

the time when he has filed the affidavit, a proposal for initiating

disciplinary enquiry against the petitioner was pending

consideration and, therefore, averment of this effect is made in

the reply. It is submitted that it is only on 25 th January, 2022, the

Department of Personnel has refused to grant permission to

initiate disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner.

Mr. Rajpurohit, learned AAG has submitted that in view of the

above facts and circumstances of the case, the affidavit filed by

Dr. K. K. Sharma in support of his reply to the contempt petition

cannot be said to be false.

Having heard Mr. Rajpurohit, learned AAG and taking into

consideration the averments made in the application, the personal

presence of Dr. K. K. Sharma before this Court for today is

exempted and it is observed that the averments made in the reply

to the contempt petition were bonafide and do not appear to be

false.

Mr. Rajpurohit, learned AAG has informed this Court that

since the State Government has already decided not to initiate

departmental proceedings against the petitioner, the

pension/service benefits of the petitioner will be settled positively

within a period of one month.

Taking into consideration the assurance given by Dr.

Rajpurohit, learned AAG, list this matter on 08.09.2022.

It is made clear that if the State fails to clear the pension /

service benefits of the petitioner by the next date of hearing, the

(3 of 3) [WCP-16/2020]

present Director, Medical and Health Services shall remain

positively present before the Court on the next date of hearing.

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

44-AjaySingh/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)