[2026:RJ-JP:32683] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 1384/2025 CNR: RJHC021080672025 | URN: CCP / 1481U / 2025 1. Mahipal Singh Kulhari S/o Shri Sultan Singh, Aged About 55 Years, R/o 221, Fronterior, Colony, Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. Sushil Jain S/o Late Shri Dhan Kumar Jain, Aged About 55 Years, R/o 102/19, Patel Marg, Man Sarover, Jaipur - 302020, Rajasthan 3. Devraj Sharma S/o Shri Umashankar Sharma, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Plot No. 8, Chithwadi Ka Bagh, Gangapole, Jaipur-302002, Rajasthan. 4. Satish Kumar Vashisth S/o Shri Radhey Shayam Vashisth, Aged About 58 Years, R/o A 104, Jagdamba Nagar, Ajmer Road, Jaipur - 302021, Rajasthan 5. Rajesh Kumar Naruka S/o Shri Roop Singh Naruka, Aged About 57 Years, R/o D-38, A, Mahesh Nagar, 80 Feet Road, Jaipur - 302015, Rajasthan. 6. Satish Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Niranjan Lal Sharma, Aged About 50 Years, R/o A-134, Ram Gali No. 4, Rajapark, Jaipur - 302004, Rajasthan. ----Petitioners Versus 1. Shri Krishan Kunal, Secretary To The Government Department Of Secondary Education, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department Of Education, Government Secretariat, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. D.P. Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manoj Sharma, AAG, assisted by Mr. Vishal Kumar HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 17/08/2026 This contempt petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging non-compliance of order dated 24.09.2025, whereby the [2026:RJ-JP:32683] (2 of 2) [CCP-1384/2025] respondents were directed to decide the representation of the petitioner by passing a speaking order. Mr. Manoj Sharma, Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents states that the representation submitted by the petitioner has been considered and decided by reasoned order dated 18.05.2026. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner does not controvert this fact. In view of passing of order dated 18.05.2026, in opinion of this Court, substantial compliance of the Courts’ order has been made. Hence this contempt petition is disposed of. Contempt notices are discharged. Pending application/s, if any, also stand/s disposed. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Gaurav Srivastava/91