Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 16531 Raj
Judgement Date : 10 December, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:53594]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Writ Contempt No. 350/2024
M/s Sandeep Phenyol, Through Its Proprietor Sandeep Sharma
S/o Sitaram Sharma Aged About 51 Years, R/o Shop No.20,
Street No.4, Durga Vihar Sri Ganganagar Mobile No. 93144-
14349 And E-Mail Address To Be [email protected]
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Sitaram Jat, Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.
2. Aashish Modi, Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner.
3. Girjesh Kant Sharma, District Elementary Education
Officer Sri Ganganagar
4. Lok Bandhu District Collector, Sri Ganganagar
5. Krishna Kunal, Secretary, Education Department, Jaipur
6. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Kirti Pareek
For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.P. Goswami for
Mr. Rajesh Panwar, AAG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHAH
Order
10/12/2025
I.A. No.01/2025:-
1. The matter comes upon an application (I.A. No.01/2025) for
dispensing of service with respondent No.2.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that she does not
want to proceed with the contempt against the respondent No.2.
3. Considering the submissions made, the application is
allowed. The name of the respondent No.2 is deleted from the
array of contemnors.
(Uploaded on 11/12/2025 at 01:21:20 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:53594] (2 of 3) [WCP-350/2024]
I.A. No.02/2025:-
1. The matter comes upon an application (I.A. 02/2025) for
early listing of the contempt petition.
2. Considering the fact that post filing of the application, the
matter has been listing on various occasions, the application has
been rendered infructuous and dismissed accordingly.
S.B. Writ Contempt No. 350/2024:-
1. The present contempt petition has been filed alleging non-
compliance of the judgment dated 21.03.2023 passed by this
Court, whereby the direction was issued to the respondents to
release the necessary payments towards the supply of the product
in question made by the petitioner, within the period of two
months from today.
2. This Court had also quashed and set aside the order dated
27.06.2011 passed by the District Education Officer,
Sriganganagar as well as the correspondence dated 07.06.2011
issued by the District Magistrate, Sriganganagar with regard to
inquiry into the allegation levelled against the petitioner.
3. Post filing of the present contempt petition, the respondents
have filed the reply and thereafter a compliance report has been
filed, wherein after adjusting the payment already made, as per
the respondents, the total sum outstanding was Rs.2,25,645/-
which was required to be paid to the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that today itself
the cheque of the requisite amount have been paid to the
petitioner through his counsel. He, therefore, asserts that nothing
survives for adjudication in the present contempt petition.
(Uploaded on 11/12/2025 at 01:21:20 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:53594] (3 of 3) [WCP-350/2024]
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was
delay in making the payment and thus interest upon delayed
payment was required to be paid.
6. Considering the fact that as far as the amount in question is
concerned, it has already paid, no case for contempt is made out.
7. The contempt petition is therefore dismissed. Notices issued
are discharged. However, the petitioner is granted liberty to
pursue his remedy as available in the law for claiming the interest
on the delayed payment, if so permissible.
(SANDEEP SHAH),J 42-charul/-
(Uploaded on 11/12/2025 at 01:21:20 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!