The petitioners were over the age limit for PTI Gr II/Gr III appointment; the court disposed the writ petition with a direction to consider their representation per the ratio of a prior judgment.
direction to consider petitioners' representation in light of the ratio of the cited judgment
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
SBCWP No.2643/12.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
O R D E R
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2643/2012.
Om Prakash Sharma & Anr.
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Date of Order:March 16, 2012.
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
Shri Deen Dayal Sharma for petitioners.
BY THE COURT:-
It is stated that petitioners crossed the age limit provided for appointment to the post of PTI Gr II and Gr III.
Similar controversy came up before this Court in the case of Pawan Kumar Bardiya & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. - SBCWP No.8046/2008, decided on 18/8/2011 and, therein, referring to the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of R.P.S.C., Ajmer Vs. Smt.Anand Kanwar – Civil Appeal No.52 of 1993, decided on 8/2/1995, the petitioners therein were not held within the age for appointment to the post in reference though a direction for consideration of the representation for grant of age relaxation was given. It is submitted that case of the petitioners may be covered by the aforesaid judgement and accordingly a direction may be given for consideration of the representation in the light of the fact that for last thirteen years, no
SBCWP No.2643/12.
2
recruitment to the post of PTI Gr.II & Gr.III has been undertaken.
In view of the aforesaid, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondents to consider petitioners' representation in the light of the judgement in the case of Pawan Kumar Bardiya supra and taking note of the hardship and the last recruitment being in the year 1998, respondents are expected to take a proper view as indicated in the judgement referred to above. It is clarified that respondents will apply the ratio of the aforesaid judgement instead of going into the facts therein. The petitioners will, however, enclose the copy of the judgement supra while copy of this order is served on the respondents.
(MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J.
Anil/66
All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being e- mailed
Anil Kumar Goyal Sr.P.A. Cum JW
SBCWP No.2643/12.
3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
O R D E R
S.B. CIVIL MISC.STAY APPLICATION NO.2115/2012. IN
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2643/2012.
Om Prakash Sharma & Anr.
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Date of Order:March 16, 2012.
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
Shri Deen Dayal Sharma for petitioners.
BY THE COURT:-
Consequent upon disposal of the petition, this stay application does not survive and the same is accordingly rejected.
(MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J.
Anil/66
All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being e-mailed
Anil Kumar Goyal Sr.P.A. Cum JW
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Pawan Kumar Bardiya & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.Referred
Pawan Kumar Bardiya & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. - SBCWP No.8046/2008, decided on 18/8/2011
R.P.S.C., Ajmer Vs. Smt. Anand KanwarReferred
R.P.S.C., Ajmer Vs. Smt. Anand Kanwar – Civil Appeal No.52 of 1993, decided on 8/2/1995
Om Prakash Sharma & Anr.
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Mohammad Raffiq
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
