The High Court dismissed the writ petition by covering it with the judgment in SB Civ. WP No.3874/2014. The directions from the earlier judgment were directed to be followed as no specific relief was needed.
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.
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3445/2015 (Avinash Meena & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.)
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3445/2015
(Avinash Meena & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.)
Date of Order : 01st October, 2015
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI
Mr.Jainendra Jain, for the petitioner/s.
By the Court:
It is stated that in the similar writ petition bearing SB Civil Writ Petition No.3874/2014 titled as Keshav Kumar & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. decided on 03rd July, 2014, the Coordinate Bench has passed following order :
“Petitioners have filed this writ petition praying for a direction to respondents to allow them joining on the post of Lower Division Clerk in pursuance of the advertisement no.458 dated 12.02.2013 or in the alternative on respective post pursuant to advertisement no.981 dated 25.03.2013 with all consequential benefits.
Petitioners have been working on the post of Accounts Assistant in MGNREGA in various Panchayat Samities in District Bharatpur on contract basis for last more than five years. Pursuant to advertisement published to fill up the
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3445/2015 (Avinash Meena & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.)
2
posts of Lower Division Clerk, petitioners applied for the same. As per the policy decision, weightage marks for experience to the candidates working in MGNREGA scheme, were to be given in the recruitment. On being selected, the petitioners were issued appointment letter and there was a condition that the appointment to the post of Lower Division Clerk shall be subject to decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP and the decision of this court in the writ petitions pending at Jodhpur/Jaipur. In the meanwhile, the respondents have also issued advertisement for recruitment to fill up the posts of Accounts Assistant under the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 and in that selection process, the documents verification of the petitioner was also done by the respondents. In those circumstances, The Director, Rural Development & Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur, has directed all the Chief Executive Officers of Zila Parishad to extend time limit for joining on the post of Lower Division Clerk till the appointments on the post of Accounts
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3445/2015 (Avinash Meena & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.)
3
Assistant are made.
On 01.07.2013 petitioners requested the respondents to allow extension of time to join on the post of Lower Division Clerk pursuant to their appointment order, till their appointment on the post of Accounts Assistant. Now the petitioners submit that despite their repeated request, the respondents are not allowing them to join the post despite selection. Hence, this writ petition with the aforesaid prayer. In the facts and circumstances of the case, writ petition is disposed of requiring the petitioners to make a representation along-with a copy of this order to respondents no.4 and 5 – Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Baran/Kota, who shall consider the same in the light that the petitioners want to continue on the post of Lower Division Clerk and do not want to accept the appointment on the post of Accounts Assistant, and pass a reasoned speaking order addressing their grievance within a period of two months from the date of its making.”
Accordingly, a prayer is made to cover the present case by the order in the case supra, as otherwise the respondents
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3445/2015 (Avinash Meena & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.)
4
would be considering the representation/request of the petitioners.
In view of the prayer made, this writ petition is also disposed of and is ordered to be covered by the judgment in the case of Keshav Kumar & Ors. (supra). It is, however, made clear that if the respondents find any difficulty to carry out the order, they would be at liberty to file the application for recalling or modification of the order within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In absence of which, it would be presumed that they have no objection to consider the case of the petitioners on their representation/request, as has
been directed in the case supra.
(M.N. BHANDARI),J.
S/No.115 Preeti, PA
All cor r ect ion s m ad e in t h e j u dgm en t / or der h ave been in cor por at ed in t h e j u dgm en t / or der bein g em ailed.
Pr eet i Asopa
P.A.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Keshav Kumar & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.Followed¶10
SB Civil Writ Petition No.3874/2014
Avinash Meena & Ors.
State of Rajasthan & Ors.
M.N. Bhandari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
