Allowed

Pragati Wife of Sh. Ravi Daughter of Shri Jitendra Kumar v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC15 Feb 2019CW/234/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses petitions from sweepers dismissed due to alleged category mismatches. The court held that administrative failure to identify specific SC/ST posts does not justify termination. It quashed the orders for violating natural justice and mandated reinstatement.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 27.12.2018 is quashed; petitioners to be reinstated with continuity of service.

Pragati Wife of Sh. Ravi Daughter of Shri Jitendra… — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writs No. 234/2019

¶3

Pragati Wife Of Sh. Ravi Daughter Of Shri Jitendra Kumar, Aged About 20 Years, Resident Of A-25 Dayanand Khadda Basti, Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Director And Joint Secretary, Local Self Government Department, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶7

The Commissioner, Jaipur Municipal Council, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶8

Deputy Commissioner, Moti Doongri Zone, Jaipur Municipal Council, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

Connected With

¶11

S.B. Civil Writs No. 263/2019

¶12

Anjali Mahar Daughter Of Nemichand Mahar, Aged About 19 Years, Resident Of 42, Gurjaro Ki Bagichi, Indra Bajar, Jaipur (Rajasthan.)

¶13

----Petitioner

¶14

Versus

¶15

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Director And Joint Secretary, Local Self Government Department, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶16

The Commissioner, Jaipur Municipal Council, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶17

Deputy Commissioner, Moti Dungari Zone, Jaipur Municipal Council, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶18

----Respondents

¶19

S.B. Civil Writs No. 337/2019

¶20

Seema Devi Wife Of Sh. Heera Lal, Daughter Of Shri Matadin, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of 19, Narayan Nagkar, Dadi Ka Phatak, Bainad Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶21

----Petitioner

¶22

Versus

¶23

(2 of 5) [CW-234/2019]

¶24

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Director And Joint Secretary, Local Self Government Department, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶25

The Commissioner, Jaipur Municipal Council, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶26

Deputy Commissioner, Moti Doongri Zone, Jaipur Municipal Council, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶27

----Respondents

¶28

S.B. Civil Writs No. 347/2019

¶29

Jyoti Harijan Daughter Of Shri Munna, Aged About 22 Years, Resident Of Kund Mohalla, Harijan Basti, Mahuwa, DistrictDausa (Rajasthan)

¶30

----Petitioner

¶31

Versus

¶32

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Director And Joint Secretary, Local Self Government Department, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶33

The Commissioner, Jaipur Municipal Council, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶34

Deputy Commissioner, Moti Doongri Zone, Jaipur Municipal Council, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶35

----Respondents

¶36

S.B. Civil Writs No. 368/2019

¶37

Gudiya Wife Of Sh. Omprakash, Daughter Of Shri Madan Lal Tamboli, Aged About 25 Years, Resident Of House No. 74, Harijan Basti, Hida Ki Mori, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶38

----Petitioner

¶39

Versus

¶40

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Director And Joint Secretary, Local Self Government Department, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶41

The Commissioner, Jaipur Municipal Council, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶42

Deputy Commissioner, Moti Doongri Zone, Jaipur Municipal Council, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶43

----Respondents

¶44

S.B. Civil Writs No. 466/2019

¶45

Poonam Sarwan D/o Gopal, Aged About 23 Years, R/o New Shiv

¶46

(3 of 5)

¶47

[CW-234/2019]

¶48

Colony, Tarkash Bagichi Pahad, Ajmer.

¶49

----Petitioner

¶50

Versus

¶51

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Local Bodies, Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶52

The Director-Cum-Ex-Officio Joint Secretary, Local Self Govt. G-3, Rajmahal Palace Residential Area, Civil Phatak, 22 Godown, Jaipur.

¶53

Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Jaipur.

¶54

Dy. Commissioner, Moti Doongari Zone, Municipal Corporation, Jaipur.

¶55

----Respondents

¶56

S.B. Civil Writs No. 513/2019

¶57

Monkia S/o Shri Nand Nal Saini, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Namutya Ka Bas, Bandikui Jagir Bandikui District Dausa.

¶58

Rachna Devi W/o Sghri Govind Kumhar, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Plot No. 93, Road No. 7, 22 Godown Kacchi Basti, Jaipur.

¶59

Nitish Kumar S/o Rajendra Kumar, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Mahariya Bus Stand, Gram Post Jassapur, Tehsil Khetri District Jhunjhunu.

¶60

----Petitioners

¶61

Versus

¶62

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary To The Government, Local Self Government Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶63

Municipal Corporation, Lal Kothi Jaipur Through Its Commissioner.

¶64

Deputy Commissioner, Moti Dungri Zone, Municipal Corporation Jaipur.

¶65

----Respondents

¶66

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Pragati, Ms. Ajali Mahar, Ms. Seema Devi, Ms. Jyoti Harijan, Ms.Gudia, Ms. Poonam Sarwan, Ms. Monika (present in persons).

(4 of 5)

[CW-234/2019]

For Respondent(s)

: Mr. Ved Prakash Meena J.L.O. & Mr. Matadeen Sharma Sr. A.O.

¶71

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

¶72

Order

¶73

15/02/2019

¶74

The matter comes up after notice, replies have been filed.

¶75

All the petitioners are working on the post of Sweeper having been appointed after being selected through lottery system. Their services were terminated without giving them any notice on the ground that they were appointed on the post of different category. Respondents have filed their reply.

¶76

However, it remains admitted that the advertisement did not bifurcate posts between SC/ST candidates and there is no procedure to identify as to who were appointed against SC post and who were appointed against ST post as no separate cut off has been laid down. From the reply, it is also admitted that the fault has occurred at the level of the Municipal Corporation, but as far as the posts are concerned, they are still lying with the corporation. The work of Sweeper is common and there is no such identifiable mark to recognize whether an individual Sweeper was appointed against SC/ST post.

¶77

It is to be noticed that in absence of any candidate of ST Category, the appointments for the post of Sweeper could not have been left vacant. No other claim of ST candidate has come forward. For the fault of the respondents, petitioners cannot be deprived of their valuable right to continue in employment. It is also noticed that principles of natural justice have not been

¶78

(5 of 5)

¶79

[CW-234/2019]

¶80

followed and no opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioners before passing of impugned order.

¶81

Accordingly, the order dated 27.12.2018 is held to be illegal and unjustified and the same is quashed and set aside with directions to the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of service.

¶82

The writ petition stands allowed. No cost.

¶83

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

¶84

Seema/165-171

Pragati Wife of Sh. Ravi Daughter of Shri Jitendra Kumar v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pragati Wife of Sh. Ravi Daughter of Shri Jitendra Kumar v. the State of Rajasthan

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

Jogendra Vs Managing Director and Ors.

Dr Rajendra Prasad Sepat and or Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Paramtap Avasthi S/O. Shri Hari Charan Avasthi Vs State of Rajasthan through Principal Secretary

Shyam Lal Boyat S/O Shri Neemura Boyat Vs the State of Rajasthan

Kartar Singh S/O Premsingh B/C Jat Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Dr. Smt. Nirmala Sharma W/O Dr. Anand Sharma Vs the State of Rajasthan