Court Imposes Rs. 50,000 Fine for Disregarding Apex Court's Directions, Orders Recovery from Officer's Salary
In a significant ruling, the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, delivered a stern rebuke to an officer for issuing an illegal order to recover pension benefits, in direct violation of directions from the Supreme Court of India. The court has imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000 on Dr. Anand Kumar Sharma, the Director of the respondent department, for his contemptuous actions, which will be deducted from his salary and deposited with the Bar Association for the welfare of advocates.
The case arose when Dr. Ram Gopal Sharma, the petitioner, challenged an order dated March 24, 2026, directing recovery of pension benefits, despite the Supreme Court's explicit instructions to refrain from such actions during the pendency of litigation. The High Court had previously allowed a writ petition in favor of the petitioner, which was unsuccessfully challenged by the department before the Division Bench.
The Apex Court, in a related special leave petition, had issued an order on February 16, 2026, restraining the respondents from recovering any amounts already paid, pending further proceedings. Ignoring these directives, Dr. Anand Kumar Sharma issued the impugned order, prompting the petitioner to approach the High Court once again.
Justice Ravi Chirania, presiding over the matter, remarked that the officer's conduct was not only illegal but also contemptuous, indicating a blatant disregard for judicial orders. The court noted that the order had attained finality and the issuance of the recovery order was unjustifiable, especially when the matter was sub judice before the Supreme Court.
The court was informed that the impugned order was withdrawn on April 13, 2026. However, Justice Chirania emphasized that the officer's actions could not be overlooked and warranted serious consequences. The court declined to initiate contempt proceedings, considering the withdrawal of the order and the request from the Additional Advocate General, but insisted on imposing costs to uphold the sanctity of judicial orders.
The officer is required to submit proof of compliance by filing a receipt of the deposit within twenty days. The matter is scheduled for compliance review on May 20, 2026.
Bottom line:-
Recovery of pension benefits initiated in violation of court orders is contemptuous and illegal. Costs imposed on the officer responsible.
Statutory provision(s): Contempt of Court, Judicial Compliance, Pension Recovery
Dr. Ram Gopal Sharma v. State of Rajasthan, (Rajasthan)(Jaipur Bench) : Law Finder Doc id # 2899734
