Dismissed

State and Ors. v. Vikas Nehra and Anr.

Rajasthan HC7 Sept 2018SAW/914/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Division Bench quashed the single bench order which set aside a cancellation of selection and permitted the appellant to join duty pending enquiry regarding allegations of irregularities in a service selection process.

What did the court decide?

The special appeals were dismissed, upholding the order permitting the appellant to proceed to duty pending the outcome of the ongoing enquiry.

State and Ors. Vs Vikas Nehra and Anr. — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1095/2017

¶3

Vikash Nehra S/o Shri Jagdish Prasad Nehra, aged 22 years, R/o F-37, Polo Ground Government Quarters, New Fatehpura, Udaipur.

¶4

----Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Rajasthan Through The Secretary, Forest Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶7

The Principal Chief Conservator, Forest (HOFF), Forest Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶8

The Chief Conservator, Forest, Udaipur.

¶9

The Dy. Conservator, Forest, Udaipur (North), Forest Department, Udaipur.

¶10

Ms. Shikha Mehra, IFS, Chief Conservator, Forest Udaipur.

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

Connected With

¶13

D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 914/2018

¶14

The State Of Rajasthan Through The Secretary, Forest Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶15

The Principal Chief Conservator, Forest (HOFF), Forest Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶16

The Chief Conservator, Forest Department, Udaipur.

¶17

The Deputy Conservator, Forest Department, Udaipur (North), Udaipur.

¶18

----Appellants

¶19

Versus

¶20

Vikas Nehra S/o Shri Jagdish Prasad Nehra, R/o F-37, Polo Ground Government Quarters, New Fatehpura, Udaipur..

¶21

Ms. Shikha Mehra, IFS, Chief Conservator, Forest Department, Udaipur.

----Respondents

(2 of 4)

[SAW-1095/2017]

For Appellant(s)

: Mr. G.R. Punia Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rajesh Punia

¶27

For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Ladrecha, AAG with Mr. Vikas Choudhary and Ms. Sonakshi Lohiya Mr. Y.P. Khileree

¶28

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

¶29

Order

¶30

07/09/2018

¶31

For the reasons mentioned in the application(1/2018), the delay of 125 days in filing the appeal [D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.914/2018] is condoned.

¶32

Since both the above mentioned appeals arise from same impugned order, they shall stand decided by this common order.

¶33

In pursuance to some newspaper report exposing the factum that only the relatives of the Forests Department Employees in Udaipur North Forest Division were selected and that the appellant/petitioner was the son of the driver in the office of the Chief Conservator of Forest, Udaipur, whereas the other two candidates were also the relatives of the employees working in the Forest Department, the selection was hurriedly cancelled vide order dated 14/07/2016.

¶34

The writ petition of the appellant/petitioner against the order dated 14/07/2016, cancelling the selection of the appellant/petitioner was allowed. The order dated 14/07/2016 was, accordingly, set aside. The appellant/petitioner was ordered to be permitted to join the duties, whereas, the respondents were allowed to proceed with the enquiry.

¶35

(3 of 4)

¶36

[SAW-1095/2017]

¶37

Two separate appeals have been filed both by the State and the petitioner against the order impugned passed by learned Single Bench.

¶38

The appellant/petitioner has preferred the D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1095/2017 against the order dated 14/10/2017 passed by learned Single Bench only to the extent vide which the direction has been issued that if the respondents on the basis of the ongoing enquiry by the Anti-Corruption Bureau, or otherwise reach to a conclusion that the appellant’s selection was in any manner influenced by any illegal means or was made inappropriately; they shall be free, rather duty bound to take appropriate proceedings.

¶39

Similarly, D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 914/2018 has been filed by the State of Rajasthan against the impugned order to the extent vide which the order cancelling the selection has been quashed.

¶40

Learned Single Bench set aside the order cancelling selection on the ground that there were no material on record to show the involvement of the appellant/petitioner in any illegality or irregularity. The genesis of the entire proceedings were based on newspaper reports. Hence, this Court finds no ground to interfere in the order dated 14/10/2017 to the extent vide which the order dated 14/07/2016 cancelling the selection has been set aside especially taking into consideration the liberty granted by learned Single Bench while allowing the petition to the respondents-State to proceed with the ongoing enquiry and the selection of the appellant/petitioner was made subject to the outcome of the said enquiry.

¶41

(4 of 4)

¶42

[SAW-1095/2017]

¶43

At the same time, we also do not find any ground to interfere or set aside the direction of the learned Single Bench allowing the respondents to proceed with the enquiry by the Anticorruption Bureau. The argument of learned counsel for the appellant/State that the said enquiry is ordered only against the appellant/petitioner is mere apprehension. We do not find any such direction in the order dated 14/10/2017 passed by learned Single Bench. Learned Additional Advocate General too verifies this fact that the enquiry shall be conducted in accordance with law and with respect to the entire selection qua Udaipur North Forest Division and not only against the appellant/petitioner.

¶44

In view of the above, both the special appeals are dismissed being devoid of merits.

¶45

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

¶46

(NIRMALJIT KAUR),J

¶47

Sanjaysolanki, srpa

State and Ors. v. Vikas Nehra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State and Ors. v. Vikas Nehra and Anr.

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

Akshay Kumar Sanghi and Anr. Vs Ratan Kumar Sanghi and Ors.

Bhanwar Lal and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Sahdev Gujrati Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Ex H/C Sunahari Lal Vs Union of India and Ors.

State of Raj. and Ors. Vs Rajendra Kumar Bhola

N.I.C.Ltd., Udaipur Vs Smt.Shanta Devi and Ors.