The Court disposed of the Writ Petition giving liberty to the petitioner to make a representation to respondents to consider his case in light of a prior judgment in another petition pending in this Court.
Liberty given to petitioner to make a representation to respondents within one month to consider his case in light of a prior 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3640/2013
Dinesh Kumar
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Anr.
DATE OF ORDER : 07/03/2013
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI
Mr. Dinesh Kumar, Petitioner present in person
Learned counsel submits that issue involved in this writ petition has already been decided by this Court in the case of Naresh Kumar Sharma & Ors. Versus State of Rajasthan & Anr. ( SBCWP No.3414/2009 & 3 other connected petitions ). The aforesaid decision was given after hearing both the parties, thus petitioner/s may be given liberty to make a representation to respondents to consider his/their case in the light of the judgment aforesaid.
In view of the prayer made, this writ petition is disposed of with liberty as prayed for. If any representation is made, respondents are directed to look into the same and if case of petitioner/s is covered by the judgment in the case of Naresh Kumar Sharma (supra), his/their case may also be considered in the light of the directions given in the judgment aforesaid subject to other eligibility and the merit. It may be in his/their category. Consideration aforesaid may be made within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order and representation.
The consideration would, however, be made to the extent of posts advertised and the order passed in this case would remain subject to final outcome of the appeal as it is recently informed that an appeal has been preferred in the case supra, thus petitioner/s has/have agreed to abide the final outcome of the appeal. Accordingly, if judgment in the case supra is reversed, then this order would be rendered ineffective.
[M.N.BHANDARI], J.
FRBOHRA/3640CWP2013.doc
Certificate:
“All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.” FATEH RAJ BOHRA, P.A.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be given liberty to make a representation to respondents considering a prior judgment.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Naresh Kumar Sharma & Ors. Versus State of Rajasthan & Anr.Relied on¶10
SBCWP No.3414/2009 & 3 other connected petitions
Dinesh Kumar
State of Rajasthan & Anr.
M.N. BHANDARI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
