Jyoti Meena D/O S R Meena vs State Of Raj. (2023:Rj-Jp:27221)
2023 Latest Caselaw 5652 Raj/2

[2023:RJ-JP:27221]

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

               S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 579/2020

                                          In

                  S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.21601/2019

Jyoti Meena D/o S R Meena, Aged About 32 Years, R/o 542-B
Railway Officer Colony, Near Drm Office Rangpur Kota Rajasthan.
                                                                      ----Petitioner
                                      Versus
1.        State Of Raj., Through Its Principal Secretary, Local Self
          Government Department, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2.        Bhawani Singh Detha, Principal Secretary, Local Self
          Government Department, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
3.        Ujjwal Rathore, Director, Local Self Bodies, Government
          Of Rajasthan, Residency Road, Jaipur (Raj.)
4.        Arunesh Kumar Sharma, Commissioner, Nagar Parishad
          Bundi District Bundi (Raj.)
                                                                   ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajesh Sharma For Respondent(s) : Ms. Archana for Mr. Anil Mehta, AAG Mr. Nitin Sinsinwar

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL

Judgment / Order

06/10/2023

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that no

contempt is made out as the petitioner's services were never

engaged by the respondents directly; but, through a placement

agency. She submits that the S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.21601/2019 itself has been dismissed vide order dated

06.04.2022 and much before that, the interim order dated

19.12.2019, out of which the instant contempt petition arises, was

[2023:RJ-JP:27221] (2 of 2) [CCP-579/2020]

also vacated by this Court vide order dated 26.08.2021 on the

premise that the petitioner was never appointed by the

respondents and he failed to implead her employer, the placement

agency, as party-respondent in the writ petition. She submits that

since the petitioner's services were never hired by them, they are

not liable to pay any salary.

Learned counsel for the petitioner could not dispute that her

services were hired through the placement agency and not by the

respondents.

In view thereof, this Court is satisfied that no contempt is

made out.

Resultantly, this contempt petition is dismissed.

Notices are discharged.

(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J

Sudha/107

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)