[2025:RJ-JP:40207] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 654/2022 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8568/2011 Mahesh Kumar Meena S/o Shri Kanhaiya Lal, Aged About 54 Years, R/o Gawoli, Post Deyal Ki Nangal, Tehsil Neem Ka Thana, Distt. Sikar At Present Residing At Nanda Surera, Tehsil Data Ramgarh, Distt. Sikar (Raj.). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, State Of Rajasthan Through Secretary, Department Of Home (Gr.-II), Jaipur, Raj. 2. Mr. Bhaskar A. Sawant, Secretary Department Of Home (Gr.-II), Jaipur, Rajasthan). 3. Mr. Raghavendra Suwasha, Inspector General Of Police (Railways) Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan). 4. Mr. Abhijeet Singh, Superintendent Of Police (SRP)/north, Jodhpur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Umang Jain, Siddharth Sogani & Mr. Anuj Rohila For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vishnu Dutt Sharma, Ms. Sunita Meena for Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma, AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 03/10/2025 1. This contempt petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging non-compliance of the order dated 09.03.2022 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8568/2011. [2025:RJ-JP:40207] (2 of 2) [CCP-654/2022] 2. Vide order dated 09.03.2022, the Court had set aside the order dated 04.05.2005 and directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with the consequential benefits therein. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though, the respondents have reinstated the petitioner in service vide order dated 15.05.2023 but he has not been paid the consequential benefits including the back wages. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that against the order dated 09.03.2022, the respondents-State has preferred D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.899/2022 which is still pending for decision. He further submits that the petitioner has already been reinstated in service. The other consequential benefits including back wages would be paid to the petitioner as per the judgment in D.B. Appeal. 5. Taking into consideration the submissions made at bar and the fact that the petitioner has already been reinstated in service in compliance of the direction of the Court, this Court deems just and proper to dispose of the present contempt petition at this stage in view of the reinstatement of the petitioner. 6. The petitioner would be at liberty to make an application for revival of the contempt petition after disposal of the D.B. Appeal, if need arises. 7. Notices stand discharged. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Ashish Kumar/81