Disposed

Mahesh Chand Sharma S/O Shri Raghuveer Prasad Sharma v. the State of Rajasthan through Director, Elementary Education

Rajasthan HC4 Jul 2018CW/13529/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a connected writ application, the petitioner submitted that the controversy arising from a previous order in S.B.Civil Writs No. 1925/2017 and Begraj has been resolved via a representation. The court accepted this submission and disposed of the current application as withdrawn/resolved, directing the petitioner to submit a new representation filed in the prior proceedings in accordance with the

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to address the representation in the connected proceeding as indicated in previous orders.

Mahesh Chand Sharma S/O Shri Raghuveer Prasad… — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writs No. 13529/2018

¶4

Mahesh Chand Sharma

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan & Ors.

¶7

----Respondents

¶8

-$$ .Zi .Ye' &, "k&" X UU ' 3 s .3 Ly 4 #5 's-mA& ilF^ :&-
Fo r Petit i o n e r (s) T!x%4$f13+2.s .L 3+ PI M u Icesh % Rq~3.aBa u n
&II 4 #-.>
'&"-% .
For esondetf& As&. . t%M :F%
& ywp- f &# h
"% xc ' ' ' 1

¶9

04/07/2018 At the very ou e petitioner submits that the controversy r writ application stands resolved in view of th ebruary, 2017, wherein the writ application w &i iklying upon the opinion in the case of Begraj Ver It is further co would be satisfied, consider and decide the@a~~$$th:e-pe&it~Bner qqd within a time frame, 2% - *i , <b in terms of the order in the case of Kuldeep Kumar Sharma Versus The State of Rajasthan & Ors.: SBCWP No. 1925/2017 and Begraj (supra), holding thus;

¶10

"After considering various grievances raised by the petitioners and narrated above, it can be redressed, if representation is given by the petitioners within ten days from today and exercise is thereupon undertaken by the department in the following manner for which their exist agreement between the parties:

¶11

(1) The petitioners would make a representation to the respondents raising their grievances against the order of

¶12

(2 of 3)

¶13

[CW-13529/2018]

¶14

posting. It would be by narrating ground for challenge of the posting. The representation aforesaid would be submitted within a period of ten days from today along with certified copy of this order. The respondent department i.e. Secondary as well as Elementary Education would immediately notify the vacant posts in different schools and out of which, in which school they are in need of a Teacher. If a vacant post exists in the school, but looking to the strength of the students, the Teacher may^. not be required then while notifying the vacant post in the school, it would be made clear by the department that against any post or posts, they do not need additional hands. It is agreed tha? i J. -if t-he,rdsepartment finds that r. *. :,$ /!.- j: g ,0L7 additional hands-ae +:.+ 3t + no$lequic%edi_n 9 porticylar school or against a &.6 o"i& - $hen such posts would; not $%*A. _w_* +L/ , .%& j; b% illed by transfecT2f or2a period of three months. e *, Lq .$"; I>,! (&.f,4&

¶15

(2) h'e 'eachers of Level I1 posted against the pl&ty %- +evel-I would be transferred back to their @kt, df r;, immediately after getting the new recruitees or pn*j$ availability of the Teach i.e. for transfer of Teachers Gr.11

¶16

(4) While underta (5) The petitionersold-beiitiwlibeb..wto e:!.Jt~s7ixfi - 3 indicate their ?*4j choice of schooli;'+heb than -it. 1s notified by the i;A:g .@! a ns/ $6 respondents.

¶17

(6) If mutual transfer is sought then it would be dealt with by the department. The request can be accepted because in the case of mutual transfer, it would not affect any one which includes even the department. The prayer for mutual transfer would be between the employees of same level of the post and set up apart from subject, if any.

¶18

(7) If the petitioners have already joined the post n pursuance of the orders under challenge, then their joining would not be taken adverse for disposal of the representation and carrying out the directions given.

¶19

(3 of 3)

¶20

[CW-13529/2018]

¶21

(8) Apart from the issues referred above, if any other issue exists to seek change of the place of transfer, the petitioners would be at liberty to make a representation showing the ground for it like posting of husband and wife at one place, illness, disability, retirement in few months or any such similar ground.

¶22

(9) It is agreed that the representation would be considered by the department within a period of two months with necessary order."

¶23

In view of the limited prayer addressed; the petitioner is " 7 7-Y , It- i! .fadirected to addres.s,""aid'efle'd'i-epre~~$h,tatib~~ . Sf& .i..-- enclosing a copy of P;" 'A; ,, $ ' 'P? A;--.) case of Kuldeep Kumar ~~ar~ia d+( ,ci:a , (supra) and px 34;/?'+. > &.:2%, .4.fr<5. '4 "

¶24

In case, the found covered by adjudication in the petitioner be also

¶25

herein above.

¶26

as indicated above, the

¶27

writ application stands d

Mahesh Chand Sharma S/O Shri Raghuveer Prasad Sharma v. the State of Rajasthan through Director, Elementary Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahesh Chand Sharma S/O Shri Raghuveer Prasad Sharma v. the State of Rajasthan through Director, Elementary Education

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

Case details

Similar cases

Vishram Singh and Ors. Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Vishnu Kant Sahu and Ors. Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Bhupesh Kumar Ahari Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Bheru Lal Kumhar S/O Shri Tulsi Ram Vs State of Rajasthan through the Secretary, Education Department

Lalit Kumar Ninama S/O Shri Karam Chand Ninama Vs State of Rajasthan through Secretary Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department

Govind Verma Vs State of Raj and Ors.