ORDER : 1. Mr. Kanishk Kataria, the then Chief Executive Officer of Zila Parishad, Alwar so also Mr. Ramswaroop, the present Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Alwar is present in the Court. 2. Though, an application being I.A. No. 03/2023 had been filed by the petitioner on 05.09.2023 seeking substitution of the respondent- Kanishk Kataria, however no formal order could be passed thereupon. 3. The petitioner herein has asserted that the Respondents-contemnors have not complied with the order dated 27.04.2022 passed in his writ petition and prayed that the respondents be punished for committing contempt of the same. 4. It may be noted that on 22.11.2023, a Coordinate Bench was constrained to pass following order: “Shri Sunil Beniwal, learned AAG, is granted last opportunity to file compliance report/reply to the contempt petition, failing which the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Alwar, shall remain present before this Court to explain as to why contempt proceedings be not initiated against him for willful and deliberate non compliance of the order dated 27.04.2022. List the matter on 20.12.2023, as prayed.” 5. An Interim Compliance Report came to be filed by the state on 22.12.2023 under the signature and affidavit of the respondent-contemnor no. 2 (Kanishk Kataria), sworn on 17.12.2023 wherein it was stated that the signatory has sent a letter dated 18.12.2023 to the state government seeking sanction/approval to comply with the order passed by the High Court and in pursuance thereof the state government vide letter dated 19.12.2023 granted approval for making requisite compliance. Copies of both the letters dated 18.12.2023 and 19.12.2023 was enclosed. (This court fails to comprehend that how the Compliance Report and affidavit could get attested on 17.12.2023 which contained letters of 18.12.2023 and 19.12.2023)? 6. Be that as it may. The matter was listed in the Court on 21.12.2023 but the same was adjourned to 14.05.2024. On 14.05.2024 it was adjourned to 17.05.2024, then to 30.05.2024, perhaps because of the heavy cause list, it could not be called. On 30.05.2024, the case was adjourned to 11.07.2024 and on such date, the record of the writ petition was ordered to be detagged and directed to be listed on 24.07.2024, in presence of the state’s counsel. Thereafter, on 24.07.2024, 02.08.2024, 20.08.2024, 24.10.2024, 12.11.2024 and 19.11.2024 it got adjourned. When the matter came up for consideration, Mr. On 30.05.2024, the case was adjourned to 11.07.2024 and on such date, the record of the writ petition was ordered to be detagged and directed to be listed on 24.07.2024, in presence of the state’s counsel. Thereafter, on 24.07.2024, 02.08.2024, 20.08.2024, 24.10.2024, 12.11.2024 and 19.11.2024 it got adjourned. When the matter came up for consideration, Mr. Khet Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner brought the glaring facts of the case to the notice of the Court, for which Mr. Kanishk Kataria, who was reported to have been transferred, was called to appear in person. 7. On previous date of hearing (21.11.2024), this Court had ordered presence of Mr. Kanishk Kataria under the impression that the application (I.A. No. 03/2023) had been allowed. 8. Be that as it may. Formal order of acceptance of I.A. No. 03/2023 is hereby passed. Amended cause title filed alongwith the application is taken on record. 9. Mr. IR Choudhary, learned Additional Advocate General produced a Compliance Report that has been filed today and submitted that the petitioner has been accorded appointment on 25.11.2024 and prayed that the notices issued to the contemnors be discharged. 10. This Court nevertheless sought explanation from the contemnor on the question of inordinate delay - when co-ordinate Bench of this Court had allowed the writ petition way back on 27.04.2022 wherein the respondents were directed to comply with the order within two months of receiving the certified copy, why the same was not complied with? 11. It was flagged that the matter was pending compliance for which a co-ordinate Bench of this Court was constrained to pass peremptory order on 22.11.2023. Inviting attention of the contemnor towards the order dated 22.11.2023 the Court asked why the needful was not done by 20.12.2023 and why should he not be punished for contempt? Then, the respondent-contemnor submitted that before he could do the needful, he got transferred from the office on 05.01.2024. 12. Mr. Choudhary, learned AAG on the basis of the reply and the Compliance Report filed today submitted that the incumbents in the office of the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Alwar has been corresponding with the State Government to sanction additional post so that the petitioner could be accommodated, and in this process sufficient time has lapsed. 13. Mr. 12. Mr. Choudhary, learned AAG on the basis of the reply and the Compliance Report filed today submitted that the incumbents in the office of the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Alwar has been corresponding with the State Government to sanction additional post so that the petitioner could be accommodated, and in this process sufficient time has lapsed. 13. Mr. Khet Singh Rajpurohit, learned counsel for the petitioner at this juncture interjected and pointed out that by way of interim order dated 26.09.2018, this Court had directed the respondents to keep one post vacant and therefore, the reason rather excuse which the respondents have placed before this Court is a farce. 14. On perusal of the Compliance Report, this Court finds that the appointment to the petitioner has been given on the post falling vacant because of the LDC, who has been dismissed from services. The Compliance Report shows that the State Government has sent a letter dated 24.11.2024 stating that sanction has already been granted on 19.12.2023 and then, the petitioner’s appointment order has been issued on 25.11.2024. 15. There is no gainsaying the fact that an interim order keeping one post reserved was passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 26.09.2018. This Court is shocked to find that when there was an interim order, how could the respondents fill all the posts (61) ignoring the interim order, which was passed in petitioner’s case? 16. This Court cannot but refrain from recording its concern about the Compliance Report, which has been filed under signature and affidavit of the present incumbent in the office, namely Mr. Ramswaroop. It is a matter of concern that the contemnor (Kanishk Kataria) who was summoned, has not even furnished a formal apology - though this Court does not need it. That apart, not even a single document has been placed which could establish that any effort was made by him for ensuring the compliance of the order. 17. It is all the more agonizing that the present contemnor sought 30 days’ additional time for complying with the order by filing an application on 22.12.2023 under the caption “Interim Compliance Report.” And, after filing of such application, he just went in oblivion and became care-free and reflected lackadaisical attitude. No effort seems to have been made by him until he was transferred on 05.01.2024. 18. No effort seems to have been made by him until he was transferred on 05.01.2024. 18. The conduct on the part of the respondent-contemnor is highly unprofessional and unvirtuous. It is reflective of his approach – give least regard to the orders passed by the Constitutional Courts. 19. The Interim Compliance Report was filed on 22.12.2023 by the contemnors, following paragraphs of which needs special mention: “2. That during the pendency of present contempt petition the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Zila Parishad, Alwar sought an approval from the Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Rajasthan for granting appointment to the petitioner on the post of Lower Division Clerk (LDC) subject to the final outcome of D.B. S.A.W preferred in the instant matter. The true and correct copy of letter dated 18.12.2023 issued by CEO, Zila Parishad, Alwar is submitted herewith and marked as Annexure CR/1. 3. That the Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Rajasthan after due deliberation has granted an approval for making compliance of the order passed by the Hon’ble Court on dated 27.04.2022 subject to the final outcome of the appeal preferred by the State Government against the order dated 27.04.2022. The true and correct copy of the communication dated 19.12.2023 issued by the Development and Panchayati Raj Department is submitted herewith and marked as Annexure CR/2. 4. That the answering Respondent humbly submit that a month time may be granted for getting the SAW listed before the Division Bench of Hon’ble Court and in the mean time the answering Respondents would pass the necessary orders with respect to grant of appointment order in favour of the petitioner.” 20. A perusal of the underlined portion of above quoted paras and the letter dated 18.12.2023 written by the contemnor reveals that he had given an impression that an appeal has been filed and hence 4 weeks’ time be allowed for getting the Special Appeal listed before the Court. It is a different aspect that by such time no appeal was filed against the order under consideration – the appeal came to be filed atleast 6 months thereafter – on 17.05.2024. 21. The contemnor has therefore, not only misguided the higher authorities of the State Government but has also tried to mislead this Court by making false assertions - needless to mention that the appeal is time barred by more than 800 days. 22. 21. The contemnor has therefore, not only misguided the higher authorities of the State Government but has also tried to mislead this Court by making false assertions - needless to mention that the appeal is time barred by more than 800 days. 22. In the Compliance Report aforesaid, he had categorically undertaken that the compliance would be made within 30 days while praying for extension of time. 23. On being transferred (05.01.2024), the contemnor felt that he is absolved of his responsibility and undertaking, unmindful of the legal position that mere transfer and even retirement does not obliterate his fault or lapse of non compliance - an officer is responsible atleast for the period he held the chair. 24. This Court is therefore, constrained to hold that the contemnor-Kanishk Kataria is guilty of civil contempt. Because, not only he has failed to comply with the orders passed by this Court but also because he has breached his own undertaking which he had given while seeking extension of 30 days’ time on 22.12.2023. He is also liable for penal action for perjury as well, for filing false affidavit. 25. At this juncture, the respondent-contemnor tendered unconditional apology and expressed remorse. He assured that he would be careful in future and no such negligence or lapse would ever be repeated. 26. Despite recording a finding of guilt - considering the young age of the contemnor, who has joined the civil services in 2019, this Court refrains from passing any order of punishment or sentence - in a hope and belief that the contemnor would take care in future. A public servant is supposed to see the plight of the litigants, who are compelled to roam from pillar to post, for compliance of the orders of the Courts for years that too after years of fighting legal battles - atleast they should get their dues within the timeline fixed by the High Court. 27. With that note, the present contempt petition is, disposed of. 28. This Court would hasten to add that the orders of the Courts are required to be complied with scrupulously. They are not subservient to approval or sanction of the State Government or higher authorities. 27. With that note, the present contempt petition is, disposed of. 28. This Court would hasten to add that the orders of the Courts are required to be complied with scrupulously. They are not subservient to approval or sanction of the State Government or higher authorities. An officer-in-charge or the State has every right to challenge order passed by the Court, for which obviously, approval/sanction can be solicited but no approval is needed for complying with the order passed by the High Court. 29. Though this Court has not punished the contemnors, but negligence and dereliction of duties of the respondent No. 2 and other incumbents in the office of Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Alwar is writ large. A copy of the order instant be sent to the Principle Secretary of Panchayati Raj Department and Department of Personnel so that disciplinary proceedings, if deemed expedient are taken against all concerned. 30. Needless to observe that the disposal of the contempt petition shall not come in petitioner’s way, if he otherwise feels dissatisfied with the compliance made. He shall be free to claim notional or other benefits which flow from the order dated 27.04.2022 passed by this Court, in accordance with law.