SINTU KUMAWAT SON Vs. ROHIT KUMAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed a contempt petition stating that the order passed by this court dated 4 th March, 2 The petitioner has filed a contempt petition stating that the order passed by this court dated 4 th March, 2020 has not been complied with. The notices were issued by this court on 4 th June, 2020. This court observed as under:

(2.) In spite of order passed by the court on 4 th June, 2020, the compliance was not made. On 9th June, 2020, the matter again came up and the court directed the Director to comply with the orders during course of the da In spite of order passed by the court on 4 th June, 2020, the compliance was not made. On 9th June, 2020, the matter again came up and the court directed the Director to comply with the orders during course of the day.

(3.) This case has been listed today and a reply has been filed wherein an order/letter dated 9th June, 2020 has been placed on record which mentions that the joining is being given to the petitioner subject to condition that for the absent period, the proceedings under CCA Rules shall be taken against him. Such an order cannot be said to be a compliance of the court's order dated 4th March, 2020. It is noticed that for almost three months, the compliance has not been made by the Director compliance has not been made by the Director and prima facie this court finds that the respondent contemnors have committed a deliberate and wilful contempt of the court.