TIKAM CHAND Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHILE disposing of the writ petition exparte against the respondents, a coordinate bench of this Court on 27.04.2011 issued following directions: -

(2.) MR . D.R. Kawadia, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the case of the petitioner for regularization was considered vide order dated 19.12.2011, in which it has been stated that since there was no sanctioned post of Cook available on 01.04.2006 when the petitioner completed ten years of service as part-time Cook, he could not be regularized as such in the service. The respondents have further urged that the services of the petitioner in the same manner as he was serving ever since 01.12.1996.

(3.) IN view of this, it cannot be said the directions to consider the case of the petitioner, straightway could result in the regularization of the petitioner. The direction was only to consider the case of the petitioner,which has been considered by the respondents vide order Annex.R/1 dated 19.12.2011. If the petitioner is not agreeable with this order, he could lay a proper challenge to the same by way of appropriate legal remedy and such challenge cannot be entertained, much-less decided, in the contempt jurisdiction in the present contempt petition.