Rajasthan High Court
Khushiram Meena S/O Shri Govind ... vs O.P. Jain (2023:Rj-Jp:18257) on 18 August, 2023
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
[2023:RJ-JP:18257]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Restoration Application No. 127/2022
In
S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No.1551/2017
Khushiram Meena S/o Shri Govind Lal, R/o Village Mirjapur,
Tehsil Gangapurcity, District Sawai Madhopur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. O.P. Jain, Chief Secretary, Government Of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur .
2. K.C. Verma, District Collector, District Sawai Madhopur
(Raj.).
3. Babu Lal Jat, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Gangapurcity,
District Sawai Madhopur (Raj).
4. Banwari Lal Sharma, Tehsildar, Tehsil Gangapurcity,
District Sawai Madhopur (Raj).
5. Jitendra Sharma, Commissioner, Nagar Parishad,
Gangapurcity, District Sawai Madhopur (Raj).
6. K.S. Koli, Executive Engineer, Public Works Department,
Division Gangapurcity, District Sawai Madhopur (Raj).
7. Talam Chand S/o Late Shri Bishnya, R/o Village Mirjapur,
Tehsil Gangapurcity, District Sawai Madhopur (Raj).
8. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Chief Secretary,
Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kirodee Lal Meena
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Akshay Sharma, AGC
Ms. Seema Ghunawat, Tehsildar,
Gangapurcity
Mr. Narsi lal Meena, Commissioner,
Nagar Palika, Gangapurcity
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Judgment / Order
18/08/2023
[2023:RJ-JP:18257] (2 of 3) [CRES-127/2022]
This restoration application has been filed seeking recall of
the order dated 29.09.2022 and restoration of the S.B. Civil
Contempt Petition No.1551/2017.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that on the wrong
statement made by the learned counsel for the State that the
encroachment has been removed, contempt petition came to be
dismissed whereas, encroachment still exists. He, therefore, prays
that the restoration application be allowed, the order dated
29.09.2022 be recalled and the S.B. Civil Contempt Petition
No.1551/2017 be restored to its original number.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents, relying upon
reply to the restoration application, would submit that barring
those encroachments for which there are interim orders by the
various Courts, all other encroachments have been removed. He,
therefore, prays for dismissal of the restoration application.
Heard. Considered.
The S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No.1551/2017 was filed
alleging willful disobedience of the order dated 25.05.2017
whereby following direction was issued:
"It is stated that writ petition may be
disposed of with liberty to make a
representation to the Collector and the
Tehsildar in regard to the grievance of the
petitioner which may be considered and
action may be taken in the matter.
In view of the aforesaid, writ petition is
disposed of with liberty sought for. In case
of representation to the Collector and the
Tehsildar, they would consider the same and
take necessary action in accordance with law
within three months from the date of receipt
of the representation along with copy of this
order."
[2023:RJ-JP:18257] (3 of 3) [CRES-127/2022]
Taking into consideration the contents of the reply filed by
the respondents and the documents appended therewith, this
Court is satisfied that there has been substantial compliance of the
order dated 25.05.2017.
In view thereof, there is no justification to allow this
restoration application and recalling the order dated 29.09.2022.
Resultantly, this restoration application is dismissed.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
Sudha/44
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
