The Supreme Court on Friday permitted a Rajasthan District Judge to withdraw his plea over the lack of basic facilities at his court and directed him to approach the Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court with his grievances.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana was hearing a contempt petition filed by Dinesh Kumar Gupta, who is posted as the Presiding Officer of a Labour Court-cum-Industrial Tribunal in Rajasthan and is due to retire in four days. Gupta had approached the Supreme Court complaining about the lack of basic facilities at his place of posting, including the absence of a stenographer and an office.
Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for Gupta, submitted that his client was the senior-most District Judge in Rajasthan but was functioning without even basic infrastructure. He submitted:
“
“He is the senior-most District Judge, just four days away from retirement. No stenographer, nothing. He is writing judgments till 2AM.”
The CJI noted that a new Chief Justice had recently taken charge of the Rajasthan High Court and advised the petitioner to place his grievances before the Chief Justice. Mr Singh then requested the Court to record the observation in its order and sought permission to withdraw the plea with liberty to approach the appropriate authority for expeditious consideration.
The Bench agreed and permitted withdrawal of the plea with liberty to pursue the grievances before the appropriate authority.
The proceedings arose from a contempt petition against Chanchal Mishra, Registrar General of the Rajasthan High Court, alleging non-compliance with the Supreme Court’s January 2026 directions concerning Gupta’s status and entitlements while serving as Presiding Officer of the Labour Court-cum-Industrial Tribunal. In January, the Supreme Court had directed that Gupta’s substantive rank would continue to be that of Principal District Judge and that he would be entitled to the allowances admissible to a Principal District Judge. It had also directed that he would not report to a junior or another District Judge, with his administrative control to remain with the Administrative/Portfolio Judge concerned.
Singh told the Bench that despite the earlier directions, Gupta continued to face difficulties in his posting, including inadequate facilities required for functioning as a judicial officer. The Supreme Court has granted him the liberty to take them up before the appropriate authority.