Shyam Prakash Shrivastava vs Dinesh Kumar on 21 November, 2019

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Shyam Prakash Shrivastava vs Dinesh Kumar on 21 November, 2019

Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                     AT JODHPUR.
                S.B. Writ Contempt No. 1477/2018

Shyam Prakash Shrivastava S/o Shri Durga Charan Shrivastava,
Aged About 57 Years, R/o Di Pandir Milkhi Ram Bhawan, Gandhi
Vidya Mandir, Sardarshahar, Churu (Raj.)
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
1.     Dr. Dinesh Kumar, Vice Chancellor, Institute Of Advanced
       Studies In Education, Deemed University Gandhi Vidhya
       Mandir, Sardar Sahar, District Churu.
2.     Shri Jitendra Pareek, Registrar, Iase, Deemed University
       Gandhi Vidhya Mandir, Sardar Sahar, District Churu
3.     Shri Panna Lal Daga, Manager, Iase, Deemed University
       Gandhi Vidhya Mandir, Sardar Sahar, District Churu
4.     Kanak Mal Duggar, President, Iase, Deemed University
       Gandhi Vidhya Mandir, Sardar Sahar, District Churu
5.     State Of Rajasthan, through Secretary Of The Govt Of
       Raj. Ministry Of Education (Group-Ist), Dept. Secretariat,
       Jaipur
                                                                ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Mahesh Thanvi.
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Himanshu Upadhyay & Mr.
                               V.R.Choudhary.



        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order 21/11/2019 In pursuance of the direction issued by this court on 05.11.2019, Mr. Jitendra Pareek, Registrar of IASE, Deemed University Gandhi Vidhya Mandir, Sardar Sahar, District Churu is present in the court today.

The counsel for the respondents submits that in pursuance of the directions issued by this court on 24.01.2008, the petitioner (Downloaded on 23/11/2019 at 08:39:05 PM) (2 of 2) [WCP-1477/2018] has been taken back in service. A joining report to that effect has also been issued on 14.11.2019.

The counsel for the petitioner does not dispute that the petitioner has joined his duties on the post which was held by him prior to passing of the order of termination dated 31.08.2007.

In view of above, nothing survives in this contempt petition. Accordingly, the present contempt is dismissed as having become infructuous. However, if any grievance of the petitioner still subsists, he shall be at liberty to avail appropriate legal remedy under the law.

The rule issued is discharged.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 40-Anil Singh/-

(Downloaded on 23/11/2019 at 08:39:05 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur