Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Dr. Smt. Shashi Agarwal vs Shri Naresh Pal Gangwar on 10 December, 2015
Author: Anupinder Singh Grewal
Bench: Anupinder Singh Grewal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR S.B.Civil Contempt Petition No.802/2014 Dr. Smt. Shashi Agarwal vs. Shri Naresh Pal Gangwar, Secretary, Ministry of Energy & Ors. Date of Order : 10.12.2015 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL Mr. Sunil Kumar Singodiya, counsel for petitioner. Mr. Ajatshatru Mina, counsel for respondents.
The petitioner has alleged disobedience and non compliance of the order dated 01.04.2013 passed by the Single Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1049/2013. The operative part of this order is reproduced hereunder:
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without any acquisition proceedings the respondents cannot take the land of the petitioner situated in khasra No.335/1 and 335/2. There is however no documentary evidence on record to show that any land of the petitioner is acquired by the Government and, if acquired, the petitioner may approach the respondents by way of filing representation. It is expected from the respondents that the representation of the petitioner will be decided objectively and expeditiously.
This writ petition is disposed of with the above observation.
Learned counsel for respondents has filed reply in court today, which is taken on record. A copy of the same has been furnished to learned counsel for the petitioner.
It is stated in the reply that in compliance with the directions of the court, the representation of the petitioner has been considered and decided vide order dated 09.12.2015. A copy of this order dated 09.12.2015 has been annexed as Annexure-R/1 with the reply.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although his representation has been decided but the action of the respondents is illegal for which he shall be seeking recourse in accordance with law.
However, keeping in view the fact that the representation of the petitioner has been decided in terms of the directions of the court, I do not intend to proceed further in the instant petition. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. Rule discharged. It shall, of course, be open to the petitioner, if so advised, to challenge the order dated 09.12.2015 in accordance with law.
(ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL),J.
Mohit All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed. Mohit Tak, P.A