JUDGMENT :

1. This contempt petition has been filed alleging willful disobedience of the order dated 08.02.2021 passed by this Court whereby, the writ petition filed by the petitioners was disposed of in the light of judgment dated 19.02.2020 passed by this Court in case of Sunita & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.838/2020.

2. At the threshold, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that compliance qua the petitioner no.2, Ashok Singh Gurjar has been made and he presses the contempt petition qua the petitioner no.1-Smt. Vinita Kumari.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents, inviting attention of this Court towards the order dated 06.12.2021 passed by the Director (Non-Gazetted), Medical and Health Services, Rajasthan, Jaipur (Annexure-R-1) appended with the reply, would submit that in pursuance of direction of this Court, candidature of the petitioner no.1 was considered in the light of experience certificate furnished by her; but, she was not found eligible for appointment. He, therefore, prays for dismissal of the contempt petition.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that although, the petitioner no.1, Smt. Vinita Kumari and the petitioner no.2, Ashok Singh Gurjar are having identical experience certificates; but, the respondents while, extending appointment to the petitioner no.2, have denied the same to the petitioner no.1 putting her to hostile discrimination. He, therefore, prays that the respondents may be directed to purge the contempt and they may also be punished suitably.

5. Heard. Considered.

6. This Court has, vide order dated 08.02.2021, contempt whereof is alleged, disposed of the writ petition filed by the petitioners in the light of judgment in case of Sunita & Ors. (supra) wherein, the petitioners were held entitled to be given benefit of bonus marks on the basis of their experience certificates for the respective post. However, the respondents were extended liberty to consider the experience certificate and if the same was found to be in order, to award bonus marks to the petitioners. Thus, the direction to award bonus marks on the basis of experience certificate was not absolute; but, was subject to its verification. A perusal of the order dated 06.12.2021 passed by the respondents reveals that the experience certificate submitted by the petitioner no.1 was not found to be in order to justify award of bonus marks. In view of the well settled legal principle, in its contempt jurisdiction, this Court is not expected to examine the legality and validity of the order dated 06.12.2021 passed by the respondents in pursuance of direction issued by this Court qua the issue raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioner no.1 has been subjected to hostile discrimination.

7. Their Lordships have succinctly explained the scope of contempt jurisdiction in case of Midnapore Peoples’ Co-op. Bank Ltd. & Ors. versus Chunilal Nanda & Ors.: AIR 2006 Supreme Court 2190 as under:-

“10.5 J. S. Parihar vs. Ganpat Duggar (supra) is nearest to this case, on facts. A contempt petition was filed alleging that the seniority list drawn pursuant to the order of the High Court was not in conformity with the said order. The High Court found it to be so, but held that the disobedience was not willful and, therefore, did not punish for contempt. But the High Court gave a direction to redraw the seniority list. The State Government challenged the said direction in an intra court appeal. The Division Bench held that the appeal was not maintainable under section 19 of the CC Act, but was maintainable as an intra-court appeal as the direction issued by the single Judge would be a "judgment" within the meaning of that expression in section 18 of Rajasthan High Court Ordinance. Accordingly, the Division Bench set aside the direction of the learned Single Judge to re-do the list. The said order was challenged before this Court. This Court confirmed the decision of the Division Be