Dismissed

Vijenderraj Singh Constable (Driver) No. 611, Son of Shri Shiv Singh v. the State of Rajasthan through Its Principal Secretary

Rajasthan HC16 Jan 2019CW/857/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable as the issue was finally decided in a prior judgment, barring multiplicity of litigation. The court directed the petitioner to approach the Rajasthan Civil Service Appellate Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition held not maintainable and disposed of; liberty to approach the Rajasthan Civil Service Appellate Tribunal granted.

Vijenderraj Singh Constable (Driver) No. 611, Son… — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writs No. 857/2019

¶3

Vijenderraj Singh Constable (Driver) No. 611, Son Of Shri Shiv Singh, Aged About 47 Years, Present Working At Police Line, Kota Rural, Kota (Rajasthan.)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Rajasthan Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Finance (Rules), Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶7

Dgp, Police Hq, Rajasthan Police, Lal Kothi, Jaipur

¶8

The Superintendent Of Police, Kota Rural, Kota (Rajasthan).

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.M.S.Raghav For Respondent(s) :

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

¶12

Judgment / Order

¶13

16/01/2019

¶14

The grievance raised by the petitioner in this petition has already been decided by this court in another writ petition and inspite of the said order having been passed, the petitioner has not been given the said benefit.

¶15

In view of this court, once an issue has been decided finally by a judgment and the same has attained finality, no further writ petitions relating to same issue would lie and multiplicity of litigation has to be curtailed. The State Government is bound to follow the verdict which has been decided by this court for all

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

[CW-857/2019]

¶18

those who are similarly situated and asking other government servants to file petition for similar relief is not justified.

¶19

However, if a person or individual is still aggrieved of noncompliance of the law laid in a judgment of this court, or nonadherence of law, he is free to take up his grievance before the Tribunal formed for the said purpose.

¶20

Accordingly, this writ petition is held to be not maintainable and in view of remedy available to the petitioner to approach the Rajasthan Civil Service Appellate Tribunal, found under the Act of 1976. If such an appeal is preferred, it is expected from the Tribunal to decide the same expeditiously not later than six months.

¶21

With the aforesaid liberty and direction, writ petition is disposed of.

¶22

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

¶23

Sandeep/-72

Vijenderraj Singh Constable (Driver) No. 611, Son of Shri Shiv Singh v. the State of Rajasthan through Its Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijenderraj Singh Constable (Driver) No. 611, Son of Shri Shiv Singh v. the State of Rajasthan through Its Principal Secretary

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

Icici Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Secretary State Government of Rajasthan

Krishan Gopal Gupta Vs State

Jagdish Narayan Sharma Vs R R v P N L and Anr.

Mathura Lal Dhakad Vs Labour Court and Indu Trib Anr.

Raj Small Industries Corp Ltd. Vs Labour Court No 2 Andanr

Mahendra Swaroop Mathur Vs Judge Labour Court and Indu Anda