Partly allowed

Vinod Kumar v. State Education and Ors.

Rajasthan HC9 Nov 2011CW/10634/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Common order disposing of multiple S.B. Civil Writ Petitions concerning arbitrary postings of Teacher Grade-II candidates. The court directed the respondents to issue postings based on merit without arbitrariness, permitted fresh representations, and extended the joining deadline to 14.11.2011.

What did the court decide?

Directors issued postings without arbitrariness after policy decision; fresh representations allowed; joining deadline extended to 14.11.2011.

Vinod Kumar Vs State Education and Ors. — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2011)

¶1

SBCWP NO. 10634/2011 Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Education) & Ors. Alongwith connected matters 1

¶2

221	(1)	S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 10634/2011.
		Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Education) & Ors.
222		...
	(2)	S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 10670/2011.
		Satveer Kour Vs. State (Education) & Ors.
223		...
	(3)	S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 10673/2011.
		Vijay Kumar & Ors. Vs. State (Education) & Ors.
225		...
	(4)	S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 10677/2011.
		Dhirendar Singh Vs. State (Education) & Ors.
227		...
	(5)	S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11004/2011.
		Deepak Barotiya Vs. State (Education) & Ors.
228		...
	(6)	S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11005/2011.
		Gopal Sharma Vs. State (Education) & Ors.
229		...
	(7)	S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11272/2011.
		Gabber Singh Vs. State (Education) & Ors.
230		...
	(8)	S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11273/2011.
		Pappa Singh Vs. State (Education) & Ors.
31		...
	(9)	S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11116/2011.
		Sunil Kumar Vs. State (Education) & Ors.
SS/1		...
	(10)	S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11302/2011.
		Ravi Kumar Vs. State (Education) & Ors. ...

¶3

Date of Order :: 9^th November 2011.

¶4

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI

¶5

Mr. S.R. Godara ] Mr. Shree Kant Verma ] Mr. Pankaj Sharma ], for the petitioner/s. Mr. H.S. Sidhu ] Mr. J.S. Bhaleria ] Mr. Vikas Bijarnia ]

¶6

Dr. Gopal Raj Calla, Govt. Counsel, for the respondents. <<>>

¶7

SBCWP NO. 10634/2011 Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Education) & Ors. Alongwith connected matters

¶8

¶9

BY THE COURT :

¶10

These writ petitions relating to the common nature grievance have been considered together. The learned Government Counsel Dr. Gopal Raj Calla, who is appearing for the Department concerned, has been requested to and has put in appearance on behalf of the respondents and has completed his instructions.

¶11

The learned Government Counsel Mr. Calla has informed that so far the present petitioners are concerned, the respondents have already taken decision on some of the representations and some representations are pending under active consideration. Dr. Calla has also placed for perusal a copy of the order dated 03.11.2011 passed by this Court at Jaipur Bench in CWP No. 15191/2011 : Mukesh Sharma Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. that reads as under:-

¶12

“By these writ petitions, grievances have been raised by the petitioners regarding their postings ignoring merit position.

¶13

It is stated that no policy has been framed by the respondents regarding posting of Teacher Grade-II, thus complaints have been made in that regard. The matter is under active consideration of the respondents. These writ petitions are, however, filed looking to the delay in taking decision as petitioners are under compulsion to join the post by 9.11.2011. In few districts, only female candidates have been given appointment leaving the meritorious candidates and at the same time, in other districts, less meritorious candidates have been given appointment leaving meritorious candidates. The petitioners are those who have obtained higher merit position but given posting at remote place. The respondents should have taken options regarding posting of the Teachers and keeping in mind their merit position, posting orders should have been issued, however, no such method has been adopted by them.

¶14

I have considered the submissions made and perused the record carefully.

¶15

SBCWP NO. 10634/2011 Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Education) & Ors. Alongwith connected matters

¶16

¶17

Since it is a matter of posting, a policy decision on the aforesaid has to be taken by the respondents only. Looking to the aforesaid, the petitioners are directed to make a detailed representation to the respondents within a period of three days from today. The respondents are then expected to look into the matter and see that postings of all the candidates are given without voice of arbitrariness and a policy decision be taken to avoid such an event. They are expected to take decision at the earliest. The petitioners may, however, join the post at the place where they are posted. It will, however, not effect their representation, rather respondents are expected to consider the representation and take a policy decision so that no discrimination remains in their action. The exercise aforesaid may be undertaken within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the representation and a policy decision taken thereupon be informed to the petitioners with a copy to this court to see its fairness.

¶18

With the aforesaid, all these writ petitions are disposed of. This disposes of stay applications also.”

¶19

Having regard to the observations made by this Court in the order dated 03.11.2011 and the overall circumstances, the grievance of the respective petitioners in these writ petitions being of similar and akin nature, it appears appropriate to issue the similar nature directions to the extent and in the manner as indicated infra:

¶20

(A) That the respondents shall look into the individual matters with reference to the requirements of the aforesaid order dated 03.11.2011 taking it applicable to all the similar and akin cases; and shall ensure that all the posting orders are issued without the vice of arbitrariness after taking policy decision at the earliest;

¶21

(B) That the petitioners, whether made representation earlier or not, shall be at liberty to make representation afresh to the respondents stating their grievance and the respondents shall be expected to consider each

¶22

SBCWP NO. 10634/2011 Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Education) & Ors. Alongwith connected matters

¶23

4 representation on its merit and take decision curbing against any vice of discrimination;

¶24

(C) That as these petitions have remained pending in this Court, it is considered appropriate in the interest of justice and hence directed that the last date of joining as provided under the appointment order dated 07.10.2011 shall stand relaxed to the extent that any of the petitioners who joins on or before 14.11.2011 shall be deemed to have joined within time, that is to say, the last date for joining shall stand extended upto 14.11.2011 in relation to the present petitioners.

¶25

It is made clear that such joining by the petitioners shall not be of prejudice to them in taking recourse to the appropriate remedies in accordance with law if any grievance remains after the respondents frame the policy decision and after decision on the individual's representation.

¶26

These writ petitions are partly allowed to the extent indicated above. No costs.

¶27

(DINESH MAHESHWARI), J .

¶28

/Mohan/

¶29

SBCWP NO. 10634/2011 Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Education) & Ors. Alongwith connected matters

¶30

¶31

222

¶32

(2) S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 10670/2011 .

¶33

Satveer Kour Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

¶34

Date of Order :: 9^th November 2011.

¶35

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI

¶36

<<>>

¶37

This writ petition stands partly allowed to the extent indicated in the common order made in the batch of petitions led by CWP No. 10634/2011 : Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Eduction) & Ors.

By Order,

COURT MASTER

/Mohan/

SBCWP NO. 10634/2011 Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Education) & Ors. Alongwith connected matters 6

¶42

223

¶43

(3) S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 10673/2011 .

¶44

Vijay Kumar & Ors. Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

¶45

Date of Order :: 9^th November 2011.

¶46

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI

¶47

<<>>

¶48

This writ petition stands partly allowed to the extent indicated in the common order made in the batch of petitions led by CWP No. 10634/2011 : Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Eduction) & Ors.

By Order,

COURT MASTER

/Mohan/

SBCWP NO. 10634/2011 Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Education) & Ors. Alongwith connected matters 7

¶53

225

¶54

(4) S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 10677/2011 .

¶55

Dhirendar Singh Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

¶56

Date of Order :: 9^th November 2011.

¶57

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI

¶58

<<>>

¶59

This writ petition stands partly allowed to the extent indicated in the common order made in the batch of petitions led by CWP No. 10634/2011 : Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Eduction) & Ors.

By Order,

COURT MASTER

/Mohan/

SBCWP NO. 10634/2011 Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Education) & Ors. Alongwith connected matters 8

¶64

227

¶65

(5) S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11004/2011 .

¶66

Deepak Barotiya Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

¶67

Date of Order :: 9^th November 2011.

¶68

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI

¶69

<<>>

¶70

This writ petition stands partly allowed to the extent indicated in the common order made in the batch of petitions led by CWP No. 10634/2011 : Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Eduction) & Ors.

By Order,

COURT MASTER

/Mohan/

SBCWP NO. 10634/2011 Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Education) & Ors. Alongwith connected matters 9

¶75

228

¶76

(6) S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11005/2011 .

¶77

Gopal Sharma Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

¶78

Date of Order :: 9^th November 2011.

¶79

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI

¶80

<<>>

¶81

This writ petition stands partly allowed to the extent indicated in the common order made in the batch of petitions led by CWP No. 10634/2011 : Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Eduction) & Ors.

By Order,

COURT MASTER

/Mohan/

SBCWP NO. 10634/2011 Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Education) & Ors. Alongwith connected matters

¶86

¶87

229

¶88

(7) S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11272/2011 .

¶89

Gabber Singh Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

¶90

Date of Order :: 9^th November 2011.

¶91

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI

¶92

<<>>

¶93

This writ petition stands partly allowed to the extent indicated in the common order made in the batch of petitions led by CWP No. 10634/2011 : Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Eduction) & Ors.

By Order,

COURT MASTER

/Mohan/

SBCWP NO. 10634/2011 Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Education) & Ors. Alongwith connected matters

¶98

¶99

230

¶100

(8) S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11273/2011 .

¶101

Pappa Singh Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

¶102

Date of Order :: 9^th November 2011.

¶103

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI

¶104

<<>>

¶105

This writ petition stands partly allowed to the extent indicated in the common order made in the batch of petitions led by CWP No. 10634/2011 : Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Eduction) & Ors.

By Order,

COURT MASTER

/Mohan/

SBCWP NO. 10634/2011 Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Education) & Ors. Alongwith connected matters 12

¶110

¶111

(9) S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11116/2011 . Sunil Kumar Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

¶112

Date of Order :: 9^th November 2011.

¶113

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI

¶114

<<>>

¶115

This writ petition stands partly allowed to the extent indicated in the common order made in the batch of petitions led by CWP No. 10634/2011 : Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Eduction) & Ors.

By Order,

COURT MASTER

/Mohan/

SBCWP NO. 10634/2011 Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Education) & Ors. Alongwith connected matters

¶120

¶121

(10) S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11302/2011 .

¶122

SS/1

¶123

Ravi Kumar Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

¶124

Date of Order :: 9^th November 2011.

¶125

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI

¶126

<<>>

¶127

This writ petition stands partly allowed to the extent indicated in the common order made in the batch of petitions led by CWP No. 10634/2011 : Vinod Kumar Vs. State (Eduction) & Ors.

¶128

By Order,

¶129

COURT MASTER

¶130

/Mohan/

Vinod Kumar v. State Education and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Kumar v. State Education and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhanwar Singh Vs State and Anr.

Narendra Kumar Nehra Vs State and Ors.

Fateh Chand Vs State and Ors.

Om Prakash and Ors. Vs Municipal Board Bhadra and Ors.

Dilip Singh Vs Raj. State Road Trans. Corpn. and Anr.

Jagjit Singh Vs State Education and Ors.