(1.) This application for contempt has been filed by the petitioner on the allegation against the respondents that they are guilty of contempt of Court and hence should be punished since they have taken certain actions against the petitioner although ostensibly in their official capacity, are in fact orders passed in order to coerce and pressurise him for withdrawing the writ petition which he had filed challenging the action of the respondents, who had abolished the post of Law Officer-cum-Enquiry Officer and had posted the petitioner to a lower post of Statistical Officer. The duty cast upon this Court in this petition therefore, is to adjudicate on the question whether the respondents can be said to have committed contempt of Court if they have taken certain disciplinary action against the petitioner so as to infer and construe these actions as a coercive measure in order to pressurise the petitioner to withdraw his writ petition pending in this Court before a learned single Judge.
(2.) The facts in its essential details, in order to appreciate the aforesaid question are stated herein as follows :
(3.) The petitioner had been working on the post of law and Enquiry Officer in the Rajasthan State Agricultural Marketing Board which was later abolished and consequently, the petitioner was posted as Statistical Officer with a lower pay scale than what he was drawing as a Law Officer. This action prompted the petitioner to file a writ petition in this Court, bearing SBCWP No. 3967/1995, wherein it was contended by the petitioner that the abolition of the post of Law and Enquiry Officer was arbitrary, discriminatory, illegal and mala fide and was passed at the instance of respondent No. 3 Ram Khiladi Meena. It was asserted therein that the abolition of the said post was merely a pretence and a cloak to remove the petitioner from the post of Law and Enquiry Officer and Shri Ram Khiladi Meena was bent upon removing the petitioner from the said post as his posting was inconvenient to Shri Meena.