HARSH TRADING COMPANY Vs. R K MEENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This contempt petition has been filed for the purported non-compliance of the order dated 25.02.2009, passed by this Court in SBCWP No.9230/2007. For facility of reference, the directives of this Court in the aforesaid writ petition are reproduced as under :

(2.) Reply of denial to the contempt petition has been filed and further an application setting out additional facts also in the form of a compliance report has been filed. It has been stated that the meeting of the Allotment Committee was held on 20.04.2012 and the Committee examined each and every application including the application of the petitioner herein and found that the petitioner did not fulfill the requirement for allotment of a plot in the Mandi in terms of Clause 4.2 of the allotment policy as he had not paid Mandi tax for the three financial years immediately preceding the date of advertisement. It has been submitted that from the record of the Mandi, it was verified that the petitioner had not paid Mandi tax for the year 2006-07 and paid Mandi tax only for the year 2007-08. The aforesaid three years were the relevant ones in view of the advertisement for allotment of plots in the Mandi having been issued on 18.05.2009. It has been submitted that as such the petitioner was not eligible for allotment of a shop in the Mandi in terms of the extant allotment policy and also in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this court in the case of Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti & Ors. Vs. Ashoka Oil Industries & Ors., 2009 1 WLC(Raj) 94. The aforesaid application pertaining to the additional facts and compliance report was filed before this court on 23.04.2012 and the averments therein duly supported by an affidavit have not been controverted for a period over one and half year by the petitioner. However, an application was filed by the petitioner before this Court on 30.05.2012 praying that the whole record of the contemnors-respondents be called for, to scrutinize the manner of complying with the order passed by this court on 25.02.2009.

(3.) The jurisdiction of this Court under a civil contempt petition, as the present petition is, is to see as to whether there has been willful disobedience of the order of the court. This Court had vide order dated 25.02.2009 in SBCWP No.9230/2007 merely directed that the case of the petitioner for allotment of a plot in the Mandi be considered strictly in accordance with law. In compliance therewith, as detailed hereinabove, the case of the petitioner for allotment of a shop in the Mandi was considered and it was found that the petitioner was not eligible for allotment of a shop in view of not satisfying the criteria under the operative allotment policy of payment of Mandi tax for three years immediately following the year of the advertisement and also for not submitting other requisite documents.