Disposed

Madhubala Duharia v. State of Raj and Anr.

Rajasthan HC7 Mar 2018CW/4870/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition by relying on a coordinate Bench's judgment in Mukesh Kumar Tailor. It directed the State to consider the petitioner's case applying the relief granted in that order if she deems eligible for appointment based on merit and vacancies.

What did the court decide?

Direction to State to consider petitioner's case applying relief from Mukesh Kumar Tailor case if eligible for appointment based on vacancies.

Madhubala Duharia Vs State of Raj and Anr. — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writs No. 4870/2018

¶3

Madhubala Duharia W/o Vikram Kumar Verma, By Caste Balai, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Umang Ashray, Ajmer Road, District Jaipur (Rajasthan.)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur

¶7

Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Bhilwara, District Bhilwara.

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Lawaniya For Respondent(s) :

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA

¶11

Order

¶12

07/03/2018

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the identical controversy stands resolved in view of adjudication made by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, at Principal Seat, Jodhpur, in a batch of writ applications, lead case being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 750/2017 ( Mukesh Kumar Tailor Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. ), vide order dated 9^th February, 2017.

¶14

It is further contended that another Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, at Jaipur Bench, while disposing of S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2194/2017, vide order dated 17^th February, 2017, further clarified that the opinion in the case of Mukesh Kumar Tailor (Supra), shall be applicable in rem to the candidate who is similarly situated and is not required to institute a separate writ

(2 of 2)

[CW-4870/2018]

application.

The operative portion of the order dated 9^th February, 2017, in the case of Mukesh Kumar Tailor (Supra), reads thus:

¶19

“In view of the fair stand taken by the respondent State and appreciating the exercise being undertaken by them to meet the situation in hand, all the abovementioned writ petitions are disposed of as under:-

¶20

a. The respondent-State shall workout the vacancies in each of the Zila Parishads as expeditiously as possible. Thereafter, the list shall be prepared of the candidate who have got more marks than the last candidate still working with the department in pursuance to the directions of this Court passed in Manju Choudhary’s case (supra).

¶21

b. Thereafter, the candidates as per the ratio of 1:2 of the vacancies available shall be called for the verification of the documents and the appointments shall be given to such like eligible candidates as per their merit equivalent to the vacancies available with the department.

¶22

c. This Court is aware that some of the candidates are bound to be left out even though they have got more marks than the last candidate but taking into account the limited number of vacancies, the said candidates shall have to try their luck in the next recruitment process afresh.

¶23

d. The said process by completed as expeditiously as possible preferably within 06 months from today.

¶24

The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly.”

¶25

In view of the above, the writ application stands disposed off

¶26

with a direction to the State-respondents to consider the case of petitioner, applying mutatis mutandis, the directions as extracted hereinabove and extend the same relief, if she is found eligible as directed by this Court vide order dated 9^th February, 2017.

¶27

(VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA)J.

¶28

SS/171

Madhubala Duharia v. State of Raj and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madhubala Duharia v. State of Raj and Anr.

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

The New India Assurence Co. Ltd. Vs Jagdish Prasad and Ors.

Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Raja and Ors.

Vishnu Prakash and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Uma Sharma Vs State of Raj and Anr.

Kiran Saini Vs State of Raj and Anr.

Ravindra Kumar Vs State of Raj and Ors.