Rajasthan High Court
CCP/1162/2024 of RAJ KUMAR VERMA S/O SHRI JAI DEV VERMA, Vs SHRI RAJ KUMAR KASWA on 17 February 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 1162/2024 In D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 407/2022 Raj Kumar Verma S/o Shri Jai Dev Verma, Aged About 48 Years, Resident Of Survey No. 1574, Sanjay Nagar, Dcm, Ajmer Road, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus Shri Raj Kumar
[2026:RJ-JP:7569-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 1162/2024
In
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 407/2022
Raj Kumar Verma S/o Shri Jai Dev Verma, Aged About 48 Years, Resident Of Survey No. 1574, Sanjay Nagar, Dcm, Ajmer Road, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
Shri Raj Kumar Kaswa, The Registrar, University of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)
:
Ms. Neha Swami for
Mr. Sandeep Saxena
For Respondent(s)
:
Mr. Ram Kishan Sharma
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Order
17/02/2026
1. By means of filing of instant contempt petition, petitioner stated disobedience of the final order dated 28.03.2022 passed in D.B. Special Appeal Writ Petition No.407/2022, whereby petitioner was held entitled to be regularized as Class-IV employee with effect from the date, his juniors have been regularized.
2. Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent- contemnor- Registrar, University of Rajasthan, Jaipur pointed out that regularization of petitioner has been made and the arrears to the tune of Rs.39,71,622/- has also been released in his bank account on 21.01.2026.
[2026:RJ-JP:7569-DB] (2 of 2) [CCP-1162/2024]
3. Counsel for petitioner does not dispute the issue of regularization and receiving of arrears of salary but contends that House Rent Allowance (HRA) has not been included in that arrears.
4. In that respect, counsel for respondent pointed out that as per Rule 4(4) of the House Rent Rules of 1989, HRA is admissible from the date of application and since petitioner submitted application of HRA on 04.04.2023, from that date, HRA to the petitioner has also been paid. A copy of Office Order dated 04.07.2023, accepting application of petitioner granting HRA to petitioner with effect from 04.04.2023 has been place on record as Annexure-R/A/1.
5. In view of above, the issue of non-compliance of final order does not survive.
6. Accordingly, contempt petition stands disposed of.
7. Notices of contempt stand discharged. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J (SUDESH BANSAL),J LALIT MOHAN /9