Disposed

Ramraj Raigar v. State Education Department Ors.

Rajasthan HC6 Jul 2018CW/12752/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition discussed against the removal of a co-petitioner in a similar case, the Court directed the petitioner to file a representation detailing grievances within two weeks. The State-respondents were directed to decide it within eight weeks via a reasoned order, and the writ stood disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file representation within two weeks; State-respondents to decide within eight weeks; writ and stay application disposed of.

Ramraj Raigar Vs State Education Department Ors. — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writs No. 12752/2017

¶3

Ramraj Raigar Son Of Shri Bhonri Lal Raigar, By Caste Raigar , Resident Of Village Beedsurat Rampura, Post And Tehsil Chaksu, District Jaipur Raj.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Rajasthan through its Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 2. Principal Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayatraj Department, Govt. of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Jaipur)

¶7

Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan Bikaner.

¶8

Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶9

District Elementary Education Officer-I, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.)

¶10

Principal/Head Master cum Panchayat Elementary Education Officer (P.E.E.O), Govt. Sr. Secondary School Kathawala, Tehsil Chaksu, District Jaipur (Raj.)

¶11

Sarwar Ali Pathan son of Shri Allaudeen Khan, aged about 42 years, resident of Village Azam Nagar, Tehsil Chaksu, District Jaipur (Raj.).

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Naval Singh Sikarwar For Respondent(s) :

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA

¶15

Order

¶16

06/07/2018

¶17

Though the matter has been listed in the category of orders awaiting service of notice on non-petitioner No.3, 5, and 6. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that private respondent No. 7, who was accorded appointment has been removed after inquiry adjudging him ineligible.

¶18

Referring to order dated 19.01.2018, in SBCWP No. 1507/2018 (Narottam Puri Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.); learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in somewhat

¶19

[CW-12752/2017]

¶20

(2 of 2)

¶21

identical factual matrix, this Court is allowed the petitioner therein (Narottam Puri), to address a comprehensive representation which was to be determined within a time frame. Hence, counsel for the petitioner submits that at this stage, the petitioner would be satisfied, if the State-respondents are directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner within a time frame, which the petitioner is ready and willing to address within two weeks hereinafter.

¶22

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the materials available on record so also having regard to the nature of grievance and prayer addressed; for the present, the petitioner is required to address a comprehensive representation to the State-respondents, detailing out his grievances, within two weeks hereinafter.

¶23

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 eight weeks from the date of receipt of the representation along with a certified copy of this order.

¶24

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

¶25

(VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA),J

¶26

M.Meena/3

Ramraj Raigar v. State Education Department Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramraj Raigar v. State Education Department 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

Nawal Kishor Kumhar S/O Shree Laluram Kumhar Vs State of Rajasthan through the Principle Secretary to the Government, Department of Home

Ramesh Chandra Labana S/O Shri Veerbhan Labana Vs the State of Rajasthan through Secretary, Medical and Family Welfare Department

Kalpana Sharma D/O Shri Jamuna Prashad Sharma, by Caste Brahmin Vs the State of Rajasthan through Its Principal Secretary, Education Department

Smt Shashibala Sharma W/O Shri Anil Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan through Chief Secretary

Hetram Vs State of Rajasthan through Principal Secretary, Medical and Health Services

Yogesh Singh Vs State of Rajasthan through Principal Secretary, Medical and Health Services, Govt. Secretariat