[2026:RJ-JP:5495] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 720/2024 Abdul Rajjak S/o Suleman Khan Tank, Aged About 62 Years, R/o Bada Mohalla, Sarwad, Dist. Ajmer (Raj.). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Local Self Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat. 2. Dr. Ravi Prakash Meharda, Director General Of Anti Corruption Bureau (Acp),jaipur(Raj.). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dharmendra Pareek For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Naruka with Ms. Ritika Naruka HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 05/02/2026 1. The petitioner has preferred the contempt petition against the order dated 29.05.2024. 2. It is contended that though the respondents have passed the order Annexure- R/1, however, substantial compliance with regard to the direction issued in the order has not been made. It is contended that sanction underl Section 17-A of Prevention of Corruption Act has not been obtained, therefore, prima-facie respondents have committed contempt of the order dated 29.05.2024. 3. Contrarily, it is contended by learned counsel for the respondents that vide order dated 29.05.2024 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6403/2024, it was directed to respondent No.6 to [2026:RJ-JP:5495] (2 of 3) [CCP-720/2024] hear the grievance of the petitioner after following the principle of natural justice. It is contended that after parting hearing to the petitioner, the respondent No.6 has passed an order Annexure R/1 dated 04.11.2024, whereby, the department concluded that prima-facie Raju Lal Meena has misused his post and has committed an act which falls within the purview of Prevention and Corruption Act and for the same, the matter has been referred to appropriate authority for granting sanction under Section 17-A of the Prevention and Corruption Act. The respondents have made substantial compliance of the order and the respondents are not competent authority to grant sanction under Section 17-A of the Prevention and Corruption Act, therefore, the civil contempt petition may be dismissed and rule may be discharged. 4. Heard and perused the material available on record. 5. In the S.B. Civil Writ Petition vide impugned order dated 29.05.2021, the respondents were directed to hear the petitioner following the principle of natural justice and to pass a speaking order. By way of Annexure- R/1 dated 04.11.2024, after parting hearing to the petitioner, respondents have passed the order and found that prima-facie an offence is made out against Raju Lal Meena and matter was referred under Section 17-A of the Prevention of Corruption Act to the competent authority for grant of sanction. The respondents are not a competent authority to grant sanction for further enquiry or investigation as per the provision contained under Section 17-A of the Prevention and Corruption Act. The respondents were directed to hear the petitioner and pass a speaking order and the respondents have [2026:RJ-JP:5495] (3 of 3) [CCP-720/2024] done the same, therefore, no contempt is made out against the respondents. 6. Accordingly, the civil contempt petition is hereby dismissed. 7. Notices are discharged. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Keshav/Rachna/93