Rajasthan High Court
CCP/208/2026 of ANIL SETHI SON OF LATE SHRI R.L. SETHI, Vs DR. DEBASISH PRUSTY, on 17 February 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 208/2026 Anil Sethi Son of Late Shri R.L. Sethi, Aged About 68 Years, Resident of Plot No. 115, Kailashpuri, Tonk Road, Jaipur-302018 (Raj.). ----Petitioner Versus 1. Dr. Debasish Prusty, Principal Secretary To The
[2026:RJ-JP:7533-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 208/2026
Anil Sethi Son of Late Shri R.L. Sethi, Aged About 68 Years, Resident of Plot No. 115, Kailashpuri, Tonk Road, Jaipur-302018
(Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1.
Dr. Debasish Prusty, Principal Secretary To The Government, Urban Development And Housing Department, Government of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2.
Shri Siddharth Mahajan, Commissioner, Jaipur Development Authority, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Jaipur.
3.
The State of Rajasthan through The Principal Secretary To The Government, Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Gaurav Sharma
For Respondent(s)
:
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. Instant contempt petition has been filed by the petitioner, alleging disobedience/non-compliance of the order(s) dated 30.08.2016, 31.08.2016, 12.09.2016 & 19.08.2019 passed in D.B. Civil Writ (PIL) Petition No. 930/2016 titled as Anil Sethi Vs. State of Rajasthan.
2. During course of arguments, counsel for petitioner does not dispute that after withdrawing the first contempt petition vide order dated 25.09.2025, no cause of action has arisen, hence, counsel for petitioner does not want to press this present contempt petition and seeks permission to withdraw the same.
[2026:RJ-JP:7533-DB] (2 of 2) [CCP-208/2026]
3. Accordingly, present contempt petition is dismissed as withdrawn. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J (SUDESH BANSAL),J LALIT MOHAN /2