[2026:RJ-JP:5832] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 676/2025 Pankaj Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Banvari Lal Sharma, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Village Kaledi, Post Hatawas, Tehsil Nangalrajawatan, District Dausa ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Gramin Vikas And Panchayatraj Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur 2. Krishn Kunal, Secretary, Gramin Vikas And Panchayatraj Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur 3. Dr. Bhag Chand Badhal, Secretary, Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Durgapura, Jaipur 4. Sitaram Jat, Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bajrang Sepat for Mr. Komal Giri Goswami For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ashutosh Udawat for Mr. Kapil Prakash Mathur, AAG, Mr. Narendra Singh Chaudhary HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 09/02/2026 It is contended by learned counsel for the respondents that vide Annexure- R3/1 compliance of the order dated 15.04.2025 has been made. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner is duly considered in the category of EWS, however he has not been granted appointment/posting, therefore, there is non-compliance of impugned order dated 15.04.2025. [2026:RJ-JP:5832] (2 of 2) [CCP-676/2025] Heard. In the impugned order dated 15.04.2025, the Court directed as under:- "In view of respective contentions of counsel for petitioner and taking into consideration the fact that petitioner has applied for the post in question in the General EWS category as well, therefore, it is hereby directed that the candidature of petitioner for the post of Teacher Grade-III Level-I be considered under the EWS category, even if the petitioner has not been granted benefit/reservation under the PH category." The Annexure- R3/1 has been passed by the respondents department which clearly indicates that the petitioner candidature for EWS category has already been considered, therefore, considering the aforesaid facts, substantial compliance of the order dated 15.04.2025 has been made. No action is required against the respondents. The petitioner is at liberty to approach the appropriate forum for redressal of the grievance with regard to the Annexure- R3/1. Accordingly, the civil contempt petition sands disposed of. The rule is discharged. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Keshav/10