Dismissed
Smt. Ram Rati v. State and Ors.
Rajasthan HCSAW/103/2015
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT…
What the court decided
AI extract
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT…
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
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR.
D.B.CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (WRIT) NO.103/2015 ( SMT.RAM RATI V/S THE STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.) ***
DATE OF ORDER
05.02.2015
HON'BLE MR. GOVIND MATHUR,J HON'BLE MISS JAISHREE THAKUR, J
Mr. D.K.Parihar for the appellant.
By the order dated 05.11.2014, learned Single Bench dismissed the writ petition preferred by the appellant-petitioner being suffered by a huge delay.
In brief, the facts of the case are that the appellant-petitioner who was working as a teacher with Panchayat Samiti, Rajgarh (Churu) came to be dismissed from service by the order dated 05.08.1997 as she failed to satisfy genuineness of the certificate submitted by her relating to the qualification of 'Vidhya Vinodani' issued by Prayag Mahila Vidhya (Mahila Vishvavidhayala), Allahabad. To challenge the order aforesaid, she preferred a petition for writ (S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3262/1997) that came to be dismissed on 11.09.2000. Suffice to mention that in the writ petition aforesaid, the institution that issued the certificate of 'Vidhya Vinodani' communicated to the court by the letter dated 21.08.2000 that the certificate concerned was not issued by it. A criminal case was also lodged against the petitioner at Police Station, Rajgarh District Churu for commission of forgery, however, a negative final report under
2
section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was given therein on 31.05.2001. After giving negative final report, the appellantpetitioner approached this court again in the year 2014 to declare the order of termination dated 05.08.1997 bad. The learned Single Bench taking into consideration the delay as noticed above, dismissed the petition for writ.
In appeal, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the appellant is that once the investigating agency arrived at a conclusion that the certificate was not forged one then the order of termination from service looses its foundation, therefore, the appellant-petitioner is entitled to be reinstated in service.
We do not find any merit in the argument advanced. As already stated, the appellant-petitioner was terminated from service in the year 1997 and a challenge to that was given but that failed, then a negative final report was given by the investigating agency in the year 2001, no explanation is given by the appellant-petitioner for approaching the court after lapse of 13 years subsequent to submission of final report. As such, we do not find any wrong with the order of the learned Single Bench dismissing the writ petition. Appeal too is dismissed accordingly.
[JAISHREE THAKUR],J. [GOVIND MATHUR], J.
Anil Singh
Smt. Ram Rati
The State of Raj. & Ors.
Govind Mathur
Jaishree Thakur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court