Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9369 (RAJ)

KHEEM SINGH PANWAR S/O SHRI PREMSINGH PANWAR v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CCP/250/2023 · 2025-08-19

Ganesh Ram Meena

Contempt Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:32556] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 250/2023 Kheem Singh Panwar S/o Shri Premsingh Panwar, Aged About 67 Years, R/o 96 Chaudhary Colony, Near Saket Nagar, Beawar, Dist. Ajmer, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Shri Bhawani Singh Detha, Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Secretariat, Jaipur. 3. Sunil Sharma, Commissioner, College Education, Shiksha Sankul, Jln Marg, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Shobha Sharma, Mr. Sunil Kumar Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Divanshu Gupta, AGC & Mr. Tanishq Aditya Parmar, for Mr. S.S. Naruka, AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 19/08/2025 1. Vide order dated 27.09.2022, the writ petition filed by the petitioner was disposed off in view of the judgment passed in the case of Ramswaroop Narwal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.; S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 23066/2018, decided on 22.03.2022. 2. In the case of Ramswaroop Narwal (supra), the Court allowed the writ petition in terms of order dated 30.09.2021 passed in the case of Dr. Laxmi Narayan Arya Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.; S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10536/2018, [2025:RJ-JP:32556] (2 of 2) [CCP-250/2023] wherein the petitioner was held to be entitled for Senior and Selection Scale and other benefits under the CAS taking into account his temporary service. It was further directed to extend the benefits to the petitioner within a period of three months. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the due benefits as ordered by the Court has already been extended to the petitioner. He has also placed on record the letter dated 11.09.2023 so also the salary bill of the arrears. 4. In view of the aforesaid, the Court finds that the order dated 27.09.2022 has been complied with. 5. Accordingly, this contempt petition is disposed of. 6. Notices discharged. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Gaurav Srivastava/Satyendra /191