Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 17739 (RAJ)

DR. SANJEEV KUMAR CHOUDHARY S/O SH. RAMDHAN CHOUDHARY v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CCP/413/2025 · 2026-02-05

Anil Kumar Upman, Sudesh Bansal

Contempt Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:5522-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 413/2025 Dr. Sanjeev Kumar Choudhary S/o Sh. Ramdhan Choudhary, Aged About 60 Years, R/o 9, Malpura House, Krishna Nagar, Near RIICO Flyover, New Sanganer Road, Mansarovar, Jaipur 302020 Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of Finance (Rules Division), Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. Sh. Akhil Arora, Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of Finance (Rules Division) Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 3. Sh. Krishna Kant Pathak, Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 4. Smt. Gayatri A. Rathore, Principal Secretary Department Of Medical And Health Services, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 5. Dr. Ravi Prakash Sharma, Director (PH), Department Of Medical And Health Services, Directorate Of Medical And Health Services, Sawsthya Bhawan, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Akshay Yadav for Mr. Bharat Yadav For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sankalp Vijay for Mr. Vigyan Shah, AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 05/02/2026 1. Counsel for petitioner submits that vide judgment dated 13.02.2025, passed in DB Civil Writ Petition No.1545/2025, [2026:RJ-JP:5522-DB] (2 of 2) [CCP-413/2025] petitioner was declared to be entitled to continue in service till attaining the age of 62 years, yet he was superannuated vide order dated 06.03.2025 on attaining the age of 60 years only, hence, this contempt petition has been filed. 2. In response thereto, counsel for respondents states that the order of superannuation dated 06.03.2025 has been withdrawn vide order dated 14.10.2025 and as a consequence, petitioner has been deemed to be continuing in service. 3. Further, it has been pointed out that the issue has been referred by the Hon’ble Supreme Court to the Larger Bench vide order dated 17.10.2025 passed in Special Leave Petition (C) No.9563/2024 (State of Rajasthan and Ors. Vs. Anisur Rahman & other connected petitions). 4. In view of above, at this stage, no disobedience of the order dated 13.02.2025 is made out. 5. Hence, this contempt petition stands disposed of 6. Notices of contempt petition stand discharged. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J (SUDESH BANSAL),J GAUTAM JAIN/18