Ashok Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 7588 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Writ Contempt No. 156/2022

Ashok Kumar S/o Shri Gemar Singh, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Uttam Singh Ki Dhani Balera, District Barmer, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Home Department, Jaipur.

2. Harsh Vardhan Agarwal, Superintendent Of Police, Jalore, District Jalore.

3. Mohan Lal Lather, Director General Of Police 105 Police Headquarter Lal Kothi Jaipur 302015. Government Of Rajasthan Jaipur Rajasthan Jaipur.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravi Bhansali, Senior Advocate Mr. Kuldeep Mathur, Senior Advocate Mr. Ripudaman Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manish Vyas, AAG, with Mr. Kailash Choudhary

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI

Order

20/05/2022

The petitioner has filed the instant contempt petition

alleging that the respondents have failed to comply with the order

dated 07.04.2021 passed by this court, whereby the Division

Bench directed the respondents to apply the judgment rendered

by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajesh Kumar to the

present petitioner and extended him the same relief. The

petitioner has pleaded in paras 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the contempt

petition as below :-

(2 of 5) [WCP-156/2022]

"5. That thereafter petitioner has approached before respondent office and provide copy of the hon'ble court order and he sought appointment to the respondents but nothing has been done by the respondents.

6. The petitioner send legal notice through his lawyer, same are send to the respondents through the speed post, its submitted as its in the legal notice.

7. That the judgment was passed by the Hon'ble court on 07.04.2021 and as per the direction of the hon'ble court respondent would be compliance the order and provide appointment to the petitioner after passed in the physical exams, but however no efforts have been made by the respondents to compliance the order passed by the hon'ble court, the respondents have full knowledge of the order passed by this hon'ble court and the direction issued by the hon'ble court are very clear and specific. It's clear willful and conscious non compliance of the judgment passed by this hon'ble court. The Act of the respondents are nothing but amounts to contempt of the hon'ble court.

8. That the judgment dated 07.04.2021 was submitted by the petitioner in the office of the respondent no. 01 & 03 but however neither of them have made any efforts to comply with the judgment passed by the hon'ble court and hence both are guilty of non compliance of the judgment passed by this Hon'ble court on 07.04.2021, for which they deserves to be punished for committing the contempt of this hon'ble court."

Apparently, thus, the pertinent assertion of the

petitioner in the contempt petition is that the respondents have

(3 of 5) [WCP-156/2022]

failed to take any action whatsoever qua the petitioner despite

being served with a copy of the order dated 07.04.2021.

Mr. Manish Vyas, learned AAG, has filed a compliance

report annexing therewith a copy of letter dated 06.09.2021

communicated to the petitioner clearly indicating that the

petitioner herein, who is a candidate of General Category, secured

38.875 marks, whereas the cut-off for the said category was

43.250 marks and thus, the petitioner was not selected as he did

not stand in merit.

The matter was taken up on 10.05.2022, on which day,

the Mr. M.L. Lathar, DGP and Mr. Harshvardhan Agarwal, S.P.

Jalore, present through VC, apprised the court that the petitioner

has intentionally concealed the fact that after receiving his

representation in terms of the order dated 07.04.2021, the

petitioner was intimated vide letter dated 06.09.2021 that he did

not secure the requisite number of marks for being appointed on

the post of Constable. It is specifically pleaded at para 5 of the

reply that these facts are in knowledge of the petitioner and the

letter dated 06.09.2021 was sent to him. A copy of this

compliance report was provided to the petitioner's counsel on

09.05.2022. An additional affidavit of the petitioner was filed on

10.05.2022, wherein there was no denial to the assertion made in

the reply that the order dated 06.09.2022 was conveyed to the

petitioner and his counsel.

An additional affidavit dated 12.05.2022 sworn by the

SP, Jalore has been filed on record, wherein it is clearly asserted

that vide registered letter dated 09.07.2021, counsel for the

petitioner was also informed that the candidature of the petitioner

was duly considered by the respondents. However, the petitioner

(4 of 5) [WCP-156/2022]

was not selected on the post of Constable as he did not secure the

requisite marks so as to stand in merit.

Mr. Ripudaman Singh, counsel representing the

petitioner insisted that he had no knowledge of these facts.

Today during the course of hearing, Mr. Manish Vyas,

learned AAG, has shown this court electronic evidence in the form

of e-mail sent to Mr. Ripudaman Singh, Advocate, in furtherance of

his legal notice dated 07.07.2021 clearly conveying that the

petitioner did not secure the requisite number of marks so as to

be selected as Constable in the General Category.

Faced with this unassailable situation, counsel Mr.

Ripudaman Singh has filed an additional affidavit, wherein has has

admitted having committed the mistake of filing the contempt

petition even after issuance of the order of rejection of the

candidature of the petitioner and he has tendered unconditional

apology for such action.

This court is of the firm view that the petitioner as well

as his counsel have intentionally concealed material facts while

filing the instant contempt petition. In the additional affidavit

dated 10.05.2022 filed by the petitioner, the specific assertion

made in the reply regarding he having been communicated the

result, wherein he did not secure the requisite number of marks,

was not disputed. The petitioner wrote a letter dated 19.07.2021

to the SP, Jalore who, in response whereto, the SP, Jalore issued

the letter dated 06.09.2021 S.No.2432 conveying to the petitioner

that he was not selected in the recruitment process on account of

failing to secure the requisite number of marks. Thus, the

petitioner as well as counsel Mr. Ripudaman Singh have made

gross mis-statement of fact while filing the instant contempt

(5 of 5) [WCP-156/2022]

petition. The conduct of the petitioner as well as counsel Mr.

Ripudaman Singh is deprecated. However, considering the fact

that the petitioner as well Mr. Ripudaman Singh are at the

threshold of their careers, we refrain from passing any adverse

order to take disciplinary action. A cost of Rs.5000/- is imposed

upon the petitioner which shall be deposited with the Rajasthan

State Legal Services Authority within a period of 30 days from

today.

The respondents have already passed the requisite

order in terms of the order dated 07.04.2021. Hence, they cannot

be held liable for contempt.

The contempt petition is, thus, dismissed.

(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J

19-Pramod/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)