[2026:RJ-JP:4190-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 935/2024 in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1462/2023 Raghukul Sodh Va Takniqui Sansthan, Plot No. 6, 7 And 8, Paras Colony, Model Town-A, Vindayaka, Jagatpura Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan Through Authorized Signatory Shri Nagendra Singh ----Petitioner Versus Smt. Rukmini Rair (IAS), Commissioner, Nagar Nigam Greater, Lal Kothi, Tonk Road, Jaipur 302015 ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pratap Singh Arya For Respondent(s) : Mr. Harish Kandpal Mr. Gaurav Saini, Commissioner, Nagar Nigam Jaipur Greater through V.C. Ms. Rukmani Rair, Former Commissioner, Nagar Nigam Jaipur Greater through V.C. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA Order 29/01/2026 1. Ms. Rukmani Rair, the then Commissioner, Nagar Nigam Greater, Jaipur and Mr. Gaurav Saini, the present Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Jaipur, are present in person through VC. 2. Issue is in respect of not making re-assessment of UD Tax properly, in compliance of the order dated 19.05.2023, passed by High Court. 3. Additional affidavits dated 29.01.2026 have been filed by Mr. Gaurav Saini, the present Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Jaipur and Ms. Rukmani Rair, the then Commissioner, Nagar Nigam Greater, [2026:RJ-JP:4190-DB] (2 of 3) [CCP-935/2024] Jaipur, stating inter alia that in compliance of the order dated 19.05.2023 passed by Hon'ble High Court, after conducting the survey and going through the documents, assessment of Urban Development Tax of Raghukul Sodh Va Takniqui Sansthan has been reassessed vide order dated 28.01.2026 and the total tax comes to the tune of Rs.4,47,229.00/- for the period from 2007- 2008 to 2025-2026. The assessment dated 28.01.2026 has also been placed on record. 4. In the affidavits, for the delay in assessment, reasons have been assigned for non-production of the documents by the petitioner and an unqualified apology has also been tendered. 5. Counsel for petitioner, having instructions from petitioner- Sansthan, does not dispute and is agreeable to pay/deposit the assessed UD Tax vide assessment dated 28.01.2026. 6. Having heard counsel for both parties and after taking into consideration the conspectus of the facts and stand of respective parties as noted hereinabove, we find that respondents may not be held guilty for committing disobedience of the directions of this Court issued vide order dated 19.05.2023 for making reassessment of the UD Tax. Now, the UD Tax has been assessed on 28.01.2026 and petitioner is also agreeable to pay the same. As far as delay is concerned, although respondents tried to explain the same but simultaneously have also tendered their unconditional and unqualified apology. 7. It is trite law that the disobedience of order of court must be deliberate and willful, to hold any person for guilty of civil contempt. In the present case, no such deliberate and willful disobedience has been established. As far as delay making re- [2026:RJ-JP:4190-DB] (3 of 3) [CCP-935/2024] assessment of UD Tax is concerned, without going into merits/de- merits of explanation, we deem it appropriate to accept the apology tendered by the concerned officers for delay. 8. Resultantly, proceedings of instant civil contempt petition are hereby closed. 9. Notices of contempt stand discharged. (SANDEEP TANEJA),J (SUDESH BANSAL),J RONAK KUMAR JAIMAN/21-S