MS. RAJKUMARI D/O SHRI SURAJMAL MALAWAT v. SMT. SHUBHRA SINGH
CCP/435/2024 · 2025-11-19
Shubha Mehta, Sudesh Bansal
Contempt Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 45678 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 45678 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:46685-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 435/2024 in D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.1573/2019 Ms. Rajkumari D/o Shri Surajmal Malawat D/o Shri Surjamal Malawat, R/o Sub Centre Kannoj, Kekri, Ajmer ----Petitioner Versus
1. Smt. Shubhra Singh, Ias, Additional Chief Secretary To The Government, Medical And Health Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretarit, Jaipur
2. Dr. Ravi Prakesh Mathur, Director, Medical And Health Services, Government Of Rajasthan, Swasthya Bhawan, C-Scheme, Jaipur
3. Dr. Sanjay Saxena, Joint Director (Administration), Medical And Health Services, Government Of Rajasthan, Swasthya Bhawan, C-Scheme, Jaipur
4. State Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary To The Government, Medical And Health Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Y.V. Nandwana For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vigyan Shah, AAG Mr. Priyam Agarwal Ms. Tanisha Panti Mr. Deepak Agarwal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA
Order 19/11/2025
1. This Contempt Petition was filed alleging inter alia that the payment of back wages in furtherance to the directions issued by the Hon’ble Division Bench, vide judgment dated 04.10.2023, have not been made.
[2025:RJ-JP:46685-DB] (2 of 2) [CCP-435/2024]
2. Additional Advocate General, on the strength of letter dated 15.10.2025, placed on record along with reply as Annexure-R/4/1, states that in furtherance to the directions, after holding the enquiry, petitioner was held entitled for the back-wages of 84 months and entire back-wages have been paid/deposited in her Bank Account.
3. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that no back- wages are due.
4. Counsel for the petitioner does not dispute deposition of the amount of back-wages as mentioned in the letter dated
15.10.2025. No counter to the letter dated 15.10.2025 has been placed on record.
5. In that view of matter, the contempt proceedings are hereby
disposed of.
6. Notices stand discharged.
(SHUBHA MEHTA),J (SUDESH BANSAL),J pcg/24