Disposed

Ajit Singh v. State Education Departmentors

Rajasthan HC23 Apr 2018CW/13201/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition regarding benefits after acquiring B.Ed., the High Court allowed the petitioner to submit a comprehensive representation within two weeks and directed state respondents to decide it within twelve weeks by a reasoned order.

What did the court decide?

Writ application disposed; petitioner allowed to submit representation within two weeks; respondents directed to decide within twelve weeks by reasoned order.

Ajit Singh Vs State Education Departmentors — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writs No. 13201/2015

¶3

Ajit Singh Son Of Thavar Singh, Aged About 35 Years, Village Dhani Bavaria (Garh) Tan Pacheri Badi, Tehsil Buhana, District Jhunjhunu

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary, Education Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶7

Commissioner, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

¶8

District Education Officer Additional Chief Executive Officer (Elementary Education), Zila Parishad, Jhunjhunu

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.S. Mahla For Respondent(s) :

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA

¶12

Order

¶13

23/04/2018

¶14

The only grievance of the petitioner is that after having acquired qualification of B.Ed. in the academic sessions 2010-11 and the petitioner being an employee as ‘Para Teacher’ since 3^rd October, 1999, his claim has not been considered for benefits on account of acquiring degree of B.Ed., despite a representation addressed in the month of August, 2012.

¶15

Learned 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.

¶16

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and on a perusal of the materials available on record; for the petitioner is

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[CW-13201/2015]

¶19

allowed to address a comprehensive representation as prayed, within two weeks hereinafter.

¶20

In case, a representation is so addressed within the period aforesaid, 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; preferably, within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of the representation along with a certified copy of this order.

¶21

With the observations and directions, as indicated above, the writ application stands disposed off.

¶22

(VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA),J

¶23

M.Meena/30

Ajit Singh v. State Education Departmentors

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajit Singh v. State Education Departmentors

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

Devi Sahay Sharma Vs R S R T C and Ors.

Sanjay Choudhary Vs State Education Department Ors.

Hari Krishan Sharma Vs R P S C Ajmer

Smt Sarita Devi Yadav Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Priyanka Kumari Prajapat Vs State of Raj and Anr.

Bharat Singh Gurjar Vs State Local Self Dept Anr.