Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 477 (RAJ)

Suresh Mathur v. Narain Lal Meena

2022-02-11

ANOOP KUMAR DHAND, MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. at the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in a batch of contempt petitions, in which only allegation is with regard to disobedience of the order passed in DB Civil Special appeal (Writ) No.663/2015 and batch of appeals decided on 06.11.2015, orders have been passed and the present case is also arising out of the order as aforesaid. 2. We deem it appropriate to dispose off this contempt petition also in terms of directions, which have been issued in Shri Banwari Lal Bhukar & another Vs. anoop Khinchi, Commissioner, College Education & Others. (D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 740/2016 and batch of contempt petitions and misc. applications decided vide order dated 01.12.2021. 3. accordingly, following directions are issued:- 4. Respondent No. 2, Commissioner, College Education, Rajasthan is now required to proceed to release payments in terms of the directions issued by this Court earlier on 06.11.2015 in D.B. Special appeal (Writ) No.663/2015 and connected appeals and clarificatory directions issued subsequently in various contempt petitions, reference of which has been made in order dated 01.12.2021 passed in Civil Contempt Petition No. 740/2016 and batch of contempt petitions and misc. applications, without further loss of time. 5. It shall be the obligation on the part of Respondent No. 2, Commissioner, College Education, Rajasthan to immediately release the dues payable to the petitioners as per the directions issued by this Court from time to time and the directions which have already been issued by the Supreme Court on 09.09.2021 in the case of State of Rajasthan Vs. Manju Saxena and Ors. (referred to in order dated 01.12.2021 passed in Civil Contempt Petition No. 740/2016 and batch of contempt petitions and misc. applications) wherein, the Supreme Court had directed compliance to be made within a period of eight weeks. 6. a brief, but clear order regarding compliance of order of the Court will have to be passed by Respondent No. 2, Commissioner, College Education, Rajasthan within a period of ten weeks from today. 7. The order in respect of the contempt petitioners, required to be passed clearly stating compliance of the order, shall be reported directly to the Registry of this Court, which shall be placed before this Court under a separate registered case. 8. 7. The order in respect of the contempt petitioners, required to be passed clearly stating compliance of the order, shall be reported directly to the Registry of this Court, which shall be placed before this Court under a separate registered case. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the contempt petition at this stage is disposed off, however, with liberty to revive, if any grievance, still remains unredressed. 9. We must make it absolutely clear that if ultimately we find that despite this order, the benefits, which the petitioners were entitled to, have not been released, this court may take very serious view of the matter and erring officials will have to be proceeded against strictly in accordance with law resulting in all serious consequences, which the case may deserve.