Disposed

Ghanshyam Dutta Sharma v. State Panchayati Raj Dep Ors.

Rajasthan HC1 May 2015CW/5868/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Bench directed authorities to consider petitioner's representation regarding his eligibility to join duty following disposal of earlier stay petition and dispose of the writ petition including stay.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to make representation for consideration of joining duty within two months; writ petition and stay application disposed of.

Ghanshyam Dutta Sharma Vs State Panchayati Raj Dep… — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5868/ 2015

¶3

Ghanshyam Dutta Sharma vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.

¶4

Date of Order-: : -1^st May, 2015

¶5

Hon ' ble Ms. Ju st ice Bela M. Tr ivedi

¶6

Mr. Tarun Choudhary, for petitioner.

¶7

ORDER

¶8

By the Court: -

¶9

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner raising the grievance that though the petitioner has been selected for the post of Lower Division Clerk and has already been allotted the concerned Zila Parishad for joining his duties, the concerned Zila Parishad is not permitting him to join because of the litigations pending before the High Court at Principal Seat, Jodhpur.

¶10

The learned counsel Mr. Tarun Choudhary for the petitioner submits that now S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4144/ 2013, in which the interim order was passed, has already been disposed of by the learned Single Bench on 7/ 11/ 2014 in view of the order dated 25/ 9/ 2013 passed by the Division Bench, and hence the petitioner is entitled to join his duty at the concerned Zila Parishad. He further submitted that though the respondents have filed the SLP against the order dated 25/ 9/ 2013 passed by the Division Bench, the case of the petitioner is required to be considered by the respondents in view of the fact that the Single Bench has disposed of the petition being No.4144/ 2013 on 7/ 11/ 2014.

¶11

In view of the above submissions, the Court is of the opinion that the petitioner may make the representation to the respondents in the light of the contentions raised by the petitioner in the present petition, and also in the light of the decisions of the Single Bench as well as Division Bench in S.B. Civil W r it Pet it ion No.4 14 4 / 1 3 & D.B. Civil Special Appeal No.6 3 0 / 2 0 1 3 , and the respondents shall consider such representation, if made by the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible and preferably within two months from the date of receipt of the representation.

¶12

With these directions, the petition is disposed of. By this order, the stay application also stands disposed of.

¶13

( Bela M. Tr ivedi) J. R.Vaishnav 33. “All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.” Ramesh Vaishnav-Personal Assistant

Ghanshyam Dutta Sharma v. State Panchayati Raj Dep Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ghanshyam Dutta Sharma v. State Panchayati Raj Dep Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dileep Kumar Vs State Panchayati Raj Dep Ors.

Major Retkaptan Singh Vs State Finance Department andANR

Satya Narayan Kumawat Vs State Personnel Departmentors

Smt Shankuntala andANR Vs State Medical and Healthors

Neeraj Jain Vs Tarkeshwar Prasd andANR

Prakash Chand Devanda Vs State Medical and Healthors