Rajasthan High Court
Hari Singh Chauhan vs Lalit K Panwar And Ors ... on 20 October, 2023
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
[2023:RJ-JP:31029]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 1331/2016
In
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9554/2007
Hari Singh Chouhan S/o Shri Mohan Singh Chouhan, aged 40
years, R/o Topdara Ward No. 33 Ajmer
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Lalit K. Panwar Chairman, Rajasthan Public Service
Commission, Ajmer
2. Giriraj Singh Khushwah, Secretary, Raj Public Service
Commission, Ajmer
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravi Kumar Kasliwal
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nitin Jain
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Judgment / Order
20/10/2023
This contempt petition has been filed alleging wilful
disobedience of the order of this Court dated 29.04.2016 passed
by this Court whereby, the writ petition filed by the petitioner was
disposed of in the same terms as in SB Civil Writ petition
No.2461/2011; RPSC versus Ms. Pooja Meena & Anr.
decided on 07.12.2011.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in case of
Ms. Pooja Meena & Anr. (supra), this Court has directed the
RPSC to permit the petitioners therein to inspect their answer
books and under the order dated 29.04.2016, the respondents
were under an obligation to permit the petitioner also to inspect
his answer books of the Rajasthan Judicial Services (Mains)
Examination-2005 (for brevity "the Examination of 2005"). He
submits that despite the aforesaid categorical direction, the
respondents are not permitting him to inspect his answer books.
[2023:RJ-JP:31029] (2 of 3) [CCP-1331/2016]
He, therefore, prays that the respondents may be directed to
purge the contempt and they may also be punished suitably.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.2, inviting
attention of this Court towards the contents of the additional
affidavit filed by him on 10.10.2023, would submit that the
answer books of the Examination of 2005 were already weeded
out in the month of December, 2007. Referring to Clause 2(a)(1)
of the Rules for Recording, Classification, Requisition of Files,
Weeding and Destruction of Records (hereinafter referred as the
"the Rules") and the note-sheets placed on record as Annexure A-
1 & Annexure A-3 alongwith the additional affidavit, he submits
that the rules required preservation of answer books falling under
Clause "O" under the heading "less than six months" for a period
of three months after declaration of the final result. He submits
that final result of the Examination of 2005 was declared on
28.06.2007 and three months thereafter completed on
27.09.2023. He submits that after taking the report from the
concerned Department that there was no order by any competent
authority to preserve the answer books, the same were weeded
out in the month of December, 2007. He fairly admits that,
although, the Chief Information Commissioner, Rajasthan has,
vide order dated 27.08.2007, directed the RPSC to provide a
photocopy of the answer books to the petitioner; but, in absence
of such report by the concerned Department, the answer books of
the petitioners could not be preserved and came to be weeded out
alongwith other answer books. Learned counsel submits that it
happened on account of a bonafide error and was not deliberate.
He, therefore, prays for dismissal of the contempt petition.
[2023:RJ-JP:31029] (3 of 3) [CCP-1331/2016]
Heard. Considered.
A perusal of the Clause 2(a)(1) of the Rules framed by the
RPSC for weeding and destruction of the record reveals that
"answer books" are to be retained for a period of three months
after declaration of the final result and the result of the
Examination of 2005 was declared on 28.06.2007. The note-
sheets submitted by the respondent No.2 on record reveal that
answer books of the Examination of 2005 were weeded out on
05.12.2007 after receiving a report from the concerned
Department that there was no order by the competent authority
for preservation of the answer books. Although, as fairly admitted
by the learned counsel for the respondents that the report was
factually incorrect inasmuch as there was already a direction of
the Chief Information Commissioner, Rajasthan vide order dated
27.08.2007 to the RPSC to provide a photocopy of the petitioners'
answer books; but, in absence of such information to the
concerned Department of the RPSC, the answer books of the
petitioners also got weeded out alongwith remaining answer books
of the Examination of 2005.
Be as it may be. Since, by the time order dated 29.04.2016
came to be passed by this Court, on account of weeding out of the
petitioners' answer books way back in the year 2007, its
compliance is rendered impossible.
Resultantly, this contempt petition is dismissed. Pending
application also stands disposed of.
The notices are discharged.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
Manish/24
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
