Allowed

Om Prakash Gurjar v. State of Raj and Ors.

Rajasthan HC28 Nov 2017CW/21962/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur bench, granted liberty for the petitioner to seek relaxation of the upper age limit. It directed the State Government to decide on his representation within four weeks and to accept offline application forms for recruitment pending that decision. The court referred to a prior judgment but distinguished another where relaxation was declined.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to file representation for age relaxation; directive to accept offline forms and decide representation within four weeks; recruitment to proceed offline pending decision.

Om Prakash Gurjar Vs State of Raj and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21962 / 2017

¶3

Om Prakash Gurjar Son of Kesar Lal Gurjar, Aged About 29 Years, Resident of Kala Kankara, Dooni, Deoli, District Tonk.

¶4

Versus

¶5

State of Rajasthan Through Its Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶6

Director General of Jaipur.

¶7

Inspector
?v* +-+* a e .*
v- 3
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramavtar Meena, Adv. J

¶8

For Respondent(s) : Dr. A.

¶9

ot, Addl. Govt. Counsel

¶10

28/11/2017

¶11

The present petitiodbr

¶12

respondentsjstate to ac n form online or hard copy of the petitio e post of Constable (General) and (Driv f the year 2017 by giving the age relaxat g limit in view of the -. mm* mqqa ~rna notification dated 23.9g008. Learned counsel for the petitioner

¶13

has further prayed that the petitioner may be permitted to the appear in the written examination and in case, he succeed, he may be given appointment with all the consequential benefits.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner has further placed reliance on an order dated 10.11.2017 passed in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.13917/2017, (Kishore Singh Gehlot Vs.State of

¶15

Rjasthan & Ors.). The Co-ordinate Bench at principal seat Jodhpur, while considering the similar grievance of the candidates like petitioner, has disposed of the writ petition.

¶16

Dr.A.S. Khangarot, learned Additional Government Counsel for the respondent also submits that the principal seat at Jodhpur has passed the order directing the candidate to submit his representation for grant of relaxation in upper age, however, he submits that taken as a direction to 'depide the petitioner's grant of "i.,'Bf.

¶17

pper age limit in a particular manner.

¶18

~h: principal seat at Jodhpur, while passing the or8er dated 4 10.11.2017 has taken iutto g of the Division A Appeal Public Service w

¶19

Commission Vs. Mahi ~FS., wherein the Division Bench has declined to age relaxation and has further set aside the ch dated 26.8.2013 granting benefit of th

¶20

The Co-ordinat idered the judgment dated 3.5.2017 and di tition in the following

¶21

"Looking to the innocuous order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Jaipur, vide its judgment dated 03.05.2017, this Court feels inclined to issue identical directions in the present petition, as under:-

¶22

Therefore, in the interest of justice, each petitioner is granted liberty to make representation to the State Government on the anvil of Rule 46 of Rules of 1989 and other corelated rules applicable to the case of relaxation with regard to the age. It is ordered that in case

¶23

the representation is filed by the petitioner in individual capacity within two weeks from today, then the State Government shall take decision upon the representation so filed within a period of four weeks, independently without persuaded by any observation made by this Court.

¶24

It is further ordered that till the representation to be made by the petitioners is considered by the State Government, the respondent shall accept the application form of the petitioners offline and proceed with the process of recruitment considering the application of each petitioner to be in order.

¶25

a. It is further-ordereddth&-iiltitie representation jr, b-% A 4" A.4 t4 .>to be ma."d;e%yi"che petitoners-.s&""nidered B ..p4, by the kzte?+overnment, the responden2 shall VI^ %' %- :.: :\ a'ccegt* the application form of the pebtners ofllide and proceed with the procip..of ?$%* r"" .& qecruitment considering the application of ea,) %etitioner to be in order. *. A v

¶26

It is further clarified that in case the State

¶27

roceed ahead e decision of of the petitioners

¶28

~jqa& :qkk-h as the decided by orde? dated 10?11.2OP7 at principal seat Jodhpur.

¶29

The respondents are directed to decide petitioner's representation or take a common decision applicable to all for grant of relaxation in upper age limit, on or before 15.12.2017.

¶30

The respondents are directed to accept offline forms (manually) of the petitioner which he is required to give before

¶31

last date i.e. 30.11.2017

¶32

The direction to decide the petitioner's representation for grant of relaxation in the upper age limit has been issued with a view to ensure speedy redressal of his grievance and same may not be taken to be a direction to decide the petitioner's representation for grant of relaxation in upper age limit in a

¶33

particular manner.

¶34

The writ
4:- 'Yy* (ASHOK KUMARTCZAUR)J. 4 @$*,.

Om Prakash Gurjar v. State of Raj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Om Prakash Gurjar v. State of Raj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vishambhar Das Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Murlidhar Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Jagdish Prasad Jat Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Gopiram Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Tek Singh Vs Gopal and Anr.

State of Rajasthan Vs Pappu @ Shantilal and Anr.