Disposed

Uma Sharma v. State of Raj and Anr.

Rajasthan HC7 Mar 2018CW/5057/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this service dispute, the petitioner sought posting under a spouse clause policy. The High Court disposed of the writ petition and stay application by directing the petitioner to submit a comprehensive representation. The court directed respondents to decide it via a reasoned order within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to submit comprehensive representation within two weeks; respondents directed to decide within four weeks.

Uma Sharma Vs State of Raj and Anr. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writs No. 5057/2018

¶3

Uma Sharma Wife Of Shri Bhawani Shankar Jaiman, By Caste Brahmin, R/o Mohalla Naya Handli, Baswa, Dausa, Rajasthan. At Present Working At Government Primary School, Vandanada (Balaji Nagar) Post Gudha Vishnoiyan, Panchayat Samiti Luni, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

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

¶7

The Director Secondary Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan.

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rishi Sharma 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 for the controversy raised in the instant writ application is with reference to the posting of the petitioner under the “spouse clause”, covered by the policy of the State-respondents.

¶14

He, therefore, submits that for the present, the petitioner would be satisfied, if the State-respondents are directed to consider and decide the representation within a time frame, which the petitioner is ready and willing to address within two weeks hereinafter.

¶15

(2 of 2) [CW-5057/2018]

¶16

In view of the limited prayer addressed; the instant writ proceedings are closed with a direction to the petitioner to address a comprehensive representation to the respondents ventilating the grievances raised herein.

¶17

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.

¶18

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

¶19

(VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA),J

¶20

Pooja/197

Uma Sharma v. State of Raj and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uma Sharma 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

Statutes considered

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.

Madhubala Duharia Vs State of Raj and Anr.

Kiran Saini Vs State of Raj and Anr.

Ravindra Kumar Vs State of Raj and Ors.