Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Tarun Deora vs Shri T Ravikanth ... on 8 October, 2024
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2024:RJ-JD:41150-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Writ Contempt No. 908/2024
1. Tarun Deora S/o Rameshwar Deora, Aged About 37 Years,
Resident Of 07, Tilak Nagar Ii, Bhadwasiya Road, Jodhpur.
2. Ankit S/o Hundraj, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of 20,
Tilak Nagar Ii, Bhadwasiya, Jodhpur.
3. Ravi Suthar S/o Babulal, Aged About 26 Years, Resident
Of Tilak Nagar Ii, Bhadwasiya, Jodhpur.
4. Usha Devi W/o Rajendra, Aged About 34 Years, Resident
Of 18, Tilak Nagar Ii, Bhadwasiya, Jodhpur.
5. Narendra Kumar Karwa S/o Ratan Lal, Aged About 30
Years, Resident Of 17, Tilak Nagar Ii, Bhadwasiya,
Jodhpur.
6. Kiran Jangid W/o Dharmendra Jangid, Aged About 43
Years, Resident Of 05, Tilak Nagar Ii, Bhadwasiya,
Jodhpur.
7. Bhupendra Singh S/o Chhotu Singh, Aged About 25
Years, Resident Of 38, Tilak Nagar Ii, Bhadwasiya,
Jodhpur.
8. Mukesh Tak S/o Magraj Tak, Aged About 47 Years,
Resident Of 03, Tilak Nagar Ii, Bhadwasiya, Jodhpur.
9. Saroj Deora W/o Manish Deora, Aged About 39 Years,
Resident Of 07, Tilak Nagar Ii, Bhadwasiya, Jodhpur.
10. Anil S/o Onkar Singh, Aged About 53 Years, Resident Of
Pariharo Ka Baas, Magra Punjla, Jodhpur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Shri T Ravikanth, Secretary, Department Of Local Self
Government, Secretariat, The State Government Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. Shri Atul Prakash, Commissioner, The Municipal
Corporation Jodhpur (North), Polytechnic College Campus,
Municipality (North) Campus, Jodhpur.
3. Shri Gaurav Agarwal, The District Collector Of Jodhpur,
Collectorate Campus Building, Kachari Parisar, Paota,
Jodhpur.
4. Shri Padamchand Dugar, Chairman, Shri Falvriddhi
Parasvanath Tappagach Sangh, Plot No 11, 12 And 13,
(Downloaded on 15/10/2024 at 09:31:42 PM)
[2024:RJ-JD:41150-DB] (2 of 3) [WCP-908/2024]
Tilak Nagar Ii, Near Indian Bank, Bhadwasiya Road,
Jodhpur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : None present
For Respondent(s) : -
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
08/10/2024
The present contempt has been preferred by the petitioners
seeking the following reliefs:-
"In view of the above-mentioned facts, it is
respectfully submitted that this Hon'ble Court may be
pleased to:
a) Initiate contempt proceedings against the alleged
contemnor for wilfully and deliberately disobeying the
judgment dated 22.05.2024.(Annex.-1)
b) Grant reasonable and exemplary costs in favour
of the Petitioners for the considerable expenses incurred in
bringing forth this petition. The deliberate and malicious
actions of the Contemnors have forced the Petitioners into
prolonged and unnecessary litigation, making it just and
equitable for the costs to be assessed reasonably and
awarded in an exemplary manner to deter such conduct in
the future.
c) Issue a directive restraining the officials or
members of the Contemnor No.2 and the Contemnor No.4
from pressuring, influencing, coercing, or threatening any of
the Petitioners to withdraw this case."
2. This contempt case has been filed alleging willful and
intentional violation of the order dated 22 nd May 2024 passed in
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.18903 of 2023 wherein this Court
passed the following orders:-
"Upon such submissions having been made at this
preliminary stage when the municipal corporation itself is
seized of the matter and has assured this Court that the
construction shall be resumed only when the private
respondent adheres to all the municipal laws and
confirmed to all the legal requirement for making such
construction, the continuence of PIL is no longer called
for. Further more, this Court has also taken note of the
[2024:RJ-JD:41150-DB] (3 of 3) [WCP-908/2024]
fact that respondent No.4 has given an assurance to the
Court that they shall not continue with the construction
without strictly adhering to the building laws/municipal
laws and all other laws in vogue.
The public interest litigation is thus, disposed of
while directing the respondents to abide and adhere with
the Municipal laws for the purpose of continuance of
construction at the premises in question. Any violation
of aforesaid directions/assurance on the part of the
respondents, shall give liberty to the petitioners to
approach this Court again, if needed."
3. No one appears for the petitioners.
4. Even so, having regard to the grievance raised by the
petitioners in this contempt case, we are not inclined to adjourn
hearing of this contempt case.
5. On a glance at the pleadings of this contempt case, we
gather that the petitioners have made allegations against the
proposed contemnors that they are not abiding by the direction
issued by this Court and, that, they should adhere to the
municipal laws.
4. We are of the opinion that there is Municipalities Law which
provide adequate remedy to the aggrieved person and, in that
view of the matter, D.B. Writ Contempt No. 908/2024 is
dismissed.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J (SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR),J
32-divya/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
