Dismissed
Prahlad Gupta v. State Panchayati Raj Dep Anr.
Rajasthan HCCW/15693/2012
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
PETITION NO. 15693/2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF…
What the court decided
AI extract
PETITION NO. 15693/2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF…
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.
1
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 15693/2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR.
ORDER
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 15693/2012
PRAHLAD GUPTA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANOTHER.
DATE OF ORDER : 04.08.2014
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
None present for the petitioner.
BY THE COURT:
This writ petition has been filed by petitioner with the prayer to direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of Teacher Grade III as person lower in merit has been given appointment with all consequential benefits.
It is contended that the petitioner applied for the post of Teacher Grade III. A challenge was made before the Hon'ble Apex Court regarding grant of bonus marks in the matter of Kailash Chand Sharma and the Hon'ble Apex decided the matter holding the grant of bonus marks for District and Rural, arbitrary and discriminatory and ordered to rectify the merit list and appointments made after 18th November, 1999. It is contended that when the same was not done, the petitioner filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6797/2002 which was decided vide order dated 30.09.2002 directing the petitioner to file representation. In compliance of the aforesaid judgment dated 30.09.2012, the petitioner filed representation but the same was not decided. It is contended that the petitioner later on came to know that large number of candidates lower in merit than the petitioner have
2
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 15693/2012
been appointed but the petitioner has not been given appointment.
The process of selection, in question, was initiated in the year 1998. Even as per petitioner's own case, his earlier writ petition was decided on 30.09.2012 and this writ petition has been filed in the year 2014. Appointments pursuant to aforesaid advertisement may have been made by now and the selection finalized. Settled position cannot be unsettled by entertaining this belated petition as in the meantime, third party interests might have accrued.
The present writ petition thus suffers from gross delay and laches and is accordingly dismissed.
(MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J.
Manoj,
S.NO.97. “All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.”
MANOJ NARWANI Personal Assistant.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition claiming appointment on the ground of lower-merit candidates being appointed can be entertained after a long delay given third-party interests.
Whether the writ petition is barred by gross delay and laches warranting dismissal.
Prahlad Gupta
State of Rajasthan
Mohammad Rafiq
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court