[2026:RJ-JP:9398] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 131/2026 Shambhu Lal Teli Son Of Sh. Jamak Lal, Aged About 63 Years, Resident Of Gomana Darwaja Ke Paas, Teliyo Ki Gali, Chhoti Sadri, Pratapgarh - Rajasthan (Rajasthan). Worked (Now Retired) As Gram Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti, Chhoti Sadri, Pratapgarh. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Sh. Joga Ram, I.a.s., Principal Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan) 2. Sh. Mahendra Singh Bhukar, Director, Directorate Of Pension And Pensioners Welfare, Rajasthan, Jaipur, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur. 3. Sh. Prabhat Singh Chundawat, R.a.s. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Pratapgarh. 4. Sh. Dinesh Meghwal, Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Chhoti Sadri, Pratapgarh Rajasthan. 5. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mananjay Singh Rathore for Mr. M.S. Raghav Mr. Vishivas Saini For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 05/03/2026 1. This civil contempt petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging non-compliance of order dated 16.01.2025 whereby, direction was given to the petitioner to submit a [2026:RJ-JP:9398] (2 of 2) [CCP-131/2026] representation before the Competent Authority in accordance with law. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner fairly submits that the representation filed by the petitioner in compliance of order dated 16.01.2025 has been decided by the Chief Executive Officer, Jila Parishad, Pratapgarh vide order dated 09.10.2025. Learned counsel submits that although, representation has been decided, the same is not in consonance with the direction given by this Court vide order dated 16.01.2025. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. 4. Only direction given by order dated 16.01.2025 was to consider the representation of the petitioner and to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. Admittedly, there is no case of deliberate and willful disobedience on the part of the respondents. Hence, no case of contempt is made out and the contempt petition is, hereby, dismissed. 5. However, it is made clear that mere dismissal of the contempt petition would not take away rights of the petitioner to challenge the order dated 09.10.2025 by way of filing substantive writ petition, if so advised. 6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (ANAND SHARMA),J NEERU/35