Disposed

Deshraj Gurajar andANR v. State Labour Depors

Rajasthan HC27 Apr 2017CW/2588/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bench held that the controversy in the writ petition was resolved by a coordinate decision granting directions on appointment procedures. Court closed proceedings, asking petitioners to submit a representation for consideration within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Writ and stay application disposed; petitioners directed to file representation within two weeks for State decision within four weeks.

Deshraj Gurajar andANR Vs State Labour Depors — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2588 / 2016

¶3

Deshraj Gurjar Son of Late Shri Murari Lal Gurjar, Aged About 25 Years, Village & Post Tesgaon, Karauli, District Karauli (raj.)

¶4

Dinesh Kumar Son of Shri Ramji Lal, Aged About 26 Years, Rupa Colony, Todabheem, Tehsil Todabheem, District Karauli (raj.).

¶5

----Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary, Labour and Employment Department, Secretariat, Jaipur

¶8

The Building & Other Construction, Workers Welfare Board, Through Its Labour Commissioner and Secretary, Jaipur, Sharm Bhawan, Hasanpura Road, Jaipur

¶9

The Labour Welfare Officer, Karauli, (raj.).

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

_____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sunil Kumar Singodiya For Respondent(s) :

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA Order

¶13

27/04/2017

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioners, at the very outset, submits that the controversy raised in the instant writ application stands resolved in view of the adjudication made by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Surendra Kumar Gurjar v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ petition Number 4582/2017 , decided on 3^rd April, 2017, with the following directions:

¶15

“(a) The State Government is restrained from appointing any persons on contract basis or otherwise allowing any person to work through placement agency on any government post or posts created under any particular scheme henceforth;

¶16

(2 of 4)

¶17

[CW-2588/2016]

¶18

(b) The State Government is henceforth directed to make appointments only in accordance with the rules framed under proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India for the various services in the State or the rules framed for the various departments, Corporations under the State;

¶19

(c) The State Government is further directed to make appointments on the posts created under various schemes sponsored by State or by the Centre on contract basis or otherwise only by conducting selection through open advertisement and after inviting applications and conducting written examinations and selecting persons on merit basis by a transparent method. For the said purpose, the State Government may lay down procedure and a recruiting agency either department wise or a Central nodal agency may be created for the said purpose keeping in view the provisions laid down for conducting public examinations. However, there shall be no interviews method followed in order to avoid any room for arbitrariness or pick and choose method and subsequent litigation;

¶20

(d) The merit of the candidates so prepared, shall be published showing the marks obtained by each candidate and after publishing the answer key;

¶21

(e) In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of State of Rajasthan vs. Mitendra Singh Rathore (SLP No.32671/2013 decided on 17.02.2017, the State Government may provide additional bonus marks to those candidates who have prior working experience with the State Government. The bonus marks quantum should be on the basis of number of years of service already rendered by any contractual employee but the exact quantum may be decided by the Government while conducting selections for individual schemes/posts;

¶22

(3 of 4)

¶23

[CW-2588/2016]

¶24

(f) Every attempt should be made to see that the entire selection process is transparent and without any ambiguity;

¶25

(g) If any selections are found to be wrongful, accountability of the concerned Officials who have conducted selection must be necessarily fixed and action be taken under the relevant provisions of law against them;

¶26

(h) Considering that such exercise would take some time to be implemented, this Court grants three months time to the Government to make such provisions from the date of submission of the certified copy of this order;

¶27

(i) All the persons presently working in the State Government through placement agency will now henceforth be treated as working directly on contractual basis till the aforesaid selection process is completed;

¶28

(j) Services of the persons however, shall be continued only if the Government takes a decision to continue them otherwise their services shall be dispensed with forthwith and new selections shall only be conducted after issuing advertisements as directed herein above.”

¶29

It is further contended that for the present; the petitioners

¶30

would be satisfied, if the State-respondents are directed to decide the representation of the petitioners, within a time frame, which they are ready and willing to address within two weeks hereinafter.

¶31

In view of the limited prayer addressed; the instant writ proceedings are closed with a direction to the petitioners to address a comprehensive representation enclosing a copy of the order in the case of Surendra Kumar Gurjar & Ors. (supra).

¶32

(4 of 4)

¶33

[CW-2588/2016]

¶34

In case, a representation is so addressed within the aforesaid period, the State-respondents are directed to consider and decide the same by a reasoned and speaking order as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. However, in no case later than four weeks from the date of receipt of the representation along with a certified copy of this order.

¶35

With the observations and directions, as indicated above, the writ as well as stay application stand disposed off.

¶36

(VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA)J.

¶37

SS/182

Deshraj Gurajar andANR v. State Labour Depors

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deshraj Gurajar andANR v. State Labour Depors

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

Narayan Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Sher Mohd. Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Dharm Singh and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Tej Karan Pareta Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Prem Singh @ Lalla Vs State of Rajasthan through P P

Haneef Khan and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan through P P