Rajasthan High Court
Smt. Seema Jain W/O Shri Sanjeev ... vs Shri Pawan Kumar Goyal on 17 August, 2022
Bench: Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, Vinod Kumar Bharwani
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 276/2022
In
D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.663/2015
1. Smt. Seema Jain W/o Shri Sanjeev Kumar Jain, Aged
About 49 Years, R/o 8, Mangal Colony, Ajmer Road,
Gayatri Nagar, Beawar, District Ajmer (Raj.).
2. Manju Jhanwar W/o Shri Gopal Jhanwar, Aged About 62
Years, R/o 87, Ganpati Nagar, College Road, Beawar,
District Ajmer (Raj.).
3. Pritam Kaur W/o Shri Mahendra Singh, Aged About 65
Years, R/o Kishan Ganj, House No. 9, Gali No. 4, Beawar,
District Ajmer (Raj.).
4. Smt. Hemlata Sharma W/o Shri Gopal Prasad Sharma,
Aged About 59 Years, R/o 1271, B.m. Sharma Nagar,
Beawar, District Ajmer (Raj.).
5. Sunita Rani W/o Shri Manjeet Singh, Aged About 60
Years, R/o Behind City Cinema, 214, Kishanganj, Beawar,
District Ajmer (Raj.).
6. Gurubachan Kaur W/o Shri Tirath Singh, Aged About 67
Years, R/o 4/15, Kishanganj, Beawar, District Ajmer
(Raj.).
7. Balram Jatav S/o Shri Tarachand Jatav, Aged About 69
Years, R/o Behind Jain Mandir, Chhawani, Beawar, District
Ajmer (Raj.).
8. Chanchal Sharma W/o Late Shri Narendra Dutt Sharma,
Aged About 61 Years, R/o Mahaveer Ganj, Gali No. 3
House No. 142, Beawar, District Ajmer (Raj.).
(Downloaded on 24/08/2022 at 10:00:39 PM)
(2 of 4) [CCP-276/2022]
9. Sunita Kaur W/o Shri Jaswant Singh, Aged About 52
Years, R/o Opposite Railway Station, Mill Road, Beawar,
District Ajmer (Raj.).
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Shri Pawan Kumar Goyal, Principal Secretary, Department
Of School Education, Government Of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Kanaram, Director, School Education Cum Elementary
Education, Bikaner (Raj.).
3. Smt. Prakash Kaur, Secretary, Managing Committee Shri
Guru Nanak Refugee Girls Upper Primary School, Station
Road, Beawar, District Ajmer.
4. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of School Education, Government Of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ishwar Lal Jain Advocate.
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI
Judgment / Order
17/08/2022
At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits
that in a batch of contempt petitions, in which only allegation is
with regard to disobedience of the order passed in DB Civil Special
Appeal (Writ) No.663/2015 and batch of appeals decided on
06.11.2015, orders have been passed and the present case is also
arising out of the order as aforesaid.
We deem it appropriate to dispose off this contempt petition
also in terms of directions, which have been issued in Shri Banwari
(3 of 4) [CCP-276/2022]
Lal Bhukar & Another Vs. Anoop Khinchi, Commissioner, College
Education & Others. (D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 740/2016
and batch of contempt petitions and misc. applications decided
vide order dated 01.12.2021.
Accordingly, following directions are issued:-
Respondent No. 2, Director, School Education cum
Elementary Education, Bikaner (Raj.) is now required to proceed
to release payments in terms of the directions issued by this Court
earlier on 06.11.2015 in D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.663/2015
and connected appeals and clarificatory directions issued
subsequently in various contempt petitions, reference of which has
been made in order dated 01.12.2021 passed in Civil Contempt
Petition No. 740/2016 and batch of contempt petitions and misc.
applications, without further loss of time.
It shall be the obligation on the part of Respondent No. 2,
Director, School Education cum Elementary Education, Bikaner
(Raj.) to immediately release the dues payable to the petitioners
as per the directions issued by this Court from time to time and
the directions which have already been issued by the Supreme
Court on 09.09.2021 in the case of State of Rajasthan Vs. Manju
Saxena and Ors. (referred to in order dated 01.12.2021 passed in
Civil Contempt Petition No. 740/2016 and batch of contempt
petitions and misc. applications) wherein, the Supreme Court had
directed compliance to be made within a period of eight weeks.
A brief, but clear order regarding compliance of order of the
Court will have to be passed by Respondent No. 2, Director, School
Education cum Elementary Education, Bikaner (Raj.) within a
period of ten weeks from today.
(4 of 4) [CCP-276/2022]
The order in respect of the contempt petitioners, required to
be passed clearly stating compliance of the order, shall be
reported directly to the Registry of this Court, which shall be
placed before this Court under a separate registered case.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, the contempt
petition at this stage is disposed off, however, with liberty to
revive, if any grievance, still remains unredressed.
We must make it absolutely clear that if ultimately we find
that despite this order, the benefits, which the petitioners were
entitled to, have not been released, this court may take very
serious view of the matter and erring officials will have to be
proceeded against strictly in accordance with law resulting in all
serious consequences, which the case may deserve.
(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACTING CJ
Sanjay Kumawat-39
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
