Petitioner challenged the illegal appointment of Respondent 3 as Assistant Director. The Court directed the Director to dispose of the petitioner's representation within 10 days with reasons.
Directed Director, Department of Ayurveda to dispose of petitioner's representation dated 02.01.2018 with a reasoned order within 10 days.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6551/2018
Laxman Prasad Sharma S/o Shri Pannalal Ji Sharma, Ayurved Medical Officer, Rajkiya Ayurved Chikitsalya, Ek Chhat Ke Niche, Bayana
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Nikhil Simlote.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA Order
11/12/2018
The petitioner states to be aggrieved of the illegal appointment of respondent no.3—Anand Kumar Sharma on the post of Assistant Director, Directorate, Department of Ayurveda, Ajmer under the Rajasthan Ayurvedic, Unani, Homeopathy and Naturopathy Service Rules, 1973 (hereinafter ‘the Rules of 1973’).
Mr.Nikhil Simlote, counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent no.3 was initially appointed as a Demonstrator in the Department of Ayurveda—a teaching post in the educational wing of the Ayurveda Department and not a post in its medical wing. As a Demonstrator in terms of the Rules of 1973 he was in due course promoted to the post of a Principal. Mr.Nikhil Simlote submitted that the respondent no.3 has now been appointed
(2 of 3)
[CW-6551/2018]
despite lacking in qualification prescribed for direct recruitment on the post and not being under the rules in line for promotion as Assistant Director, Department of Ayurveda—a post to be filled under the Rules of 1973 to an extent of 50% by direct recruitment and 50% by promotion from the feeder cadre of Ayurveda Chikitsa Adhikaris. Aggrieved of the illegal appointment of respondent no.3 as Assistant Director, Directorate, Department of Ayurveda, a representation was made by the petitioner to the Director, Department of Ayurveda on 02.01.2018. It yet remains unaddressed to the illegal benefit of respondent no.3 and the detriment of the petitioner otherwise entitled for consideration for promotion from the post of Ayurveda Chikitsa Adhikari—which he holds—to that of Assistant Director.
Having heard the counsel for the petitioner and perused the Rules of 1973, I am of the considered view that the issue as agitated in this petition is quite straight forward and a matter of administration as it relates to appropriate promotion/appointment under the governing statutory rules. The Directer, Department of Ayurveda should, in the circumstance, be required to address the petitioner’s representation ventilating his grievances against the appointment of respondent no.3 as Assistant Directer, Department of Ayurveda. I would therefore be inclined to first require the Directer, Department of Ayurveda to dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 02.01.2018 by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 10 days from the receipt of a certified copy of this order.
(3 of 3) [CW-6551/2018]
To facilitate compliance with the court’s order, a copy of the representation earlier submitted on 02.01.2018 to the Directer, Department of Ayurveda be also furnished to him afresh by the petitioner, alongwith a certified copy of this order.
The petition stands disposed of accordingly.
(ALOK SHARMA),J
Karan/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appointment of a Demonstrator promoted to Principal to Assistant Director is valid despite qualification discrepancies and promotion rule violations?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Laxman Prasad Sharma
The State Of Rajasthan Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Ayurved
The Director, Department Of Ayurved
Shri Anand Kumar Sharma
Allok Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
