DR. MAHESH CHANDRA ACHARYA SON OF SHRI MADHAV LAL ACHARYA v. AKHIL ARORA
CMAP/306/2024 · 2025-01-23
Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, Shubha Mehta
Special Leave Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 33432 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 33432 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:3415-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D. B. Civil Misc. Application No. 306/2024 In D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 1129/2022 In D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15114/2021 Dr. Mahesh Chandra Acharya Son Of Shri Madhav Lal Acharya, Aged About 61 Years, Resident Of Shri Madhav D-218, Nayi Abadi, Kankroli, District Rajsamand, Rajasthan ----Applicant-Petitioner Versus
1. Akhil Arora, Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of Finance (Rules Division), Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan
2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of Finance (Rules Division), Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan
3. Hemant Kumar Gera, Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan
4. Smt. Vinita Srivastava, Principal Secretary, Ayurved And Bhartiya Chikitsa Vibhag, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur
5. Dr. Anand Kumar Sharma, Director, Ayurved And Bhartiya Chikitsa Vibhag, Government Of Rajasthan, Ajmer ----Respondents For Applicant- Petitioner : Mr. Nitesh Kumar Garg Advocate.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA
Order 23/01/2025
1. There is prayer for revival of the contempt petition in view of
order dated 30.01.2024 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court whereby SLP filed by the State has been dismissed.
[2025:RJ-JP:3415-DB] (2 of 2) [CMAP-306/2024]
2. Once the SLP has been dismissed, it goes without saying that the respondents are under an obligation to comply with order of this Court. Instead of reviving the contempt petition, we are inclined to dispose off this application by directing that now the
order passed by this Court be complied with forthwith. If the order passed by this Court is not complied with, the applicant would be at liberty to apply for revival of the contempt petition.
3. Application is disposed off accordingly.
(SHUBHA MEHTA),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),CJ MANOJ NARWANI-DAKSH /188