Dismissed

State of Raj. and Ors. v. Manoj Kumar

Rajasthan HC3 Jan 2019SAW/1782/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the special appeal filed by the State of Rajasthan and others. Upholding the Single Judge's order, the Court held that a valid birth certificate issued by the State establishing the respondent as an adult was conclusive. The Court ruled that the employee could not be blamed for erroneous service entries made by institution staff and was entitled to absorption.

What did the court decide?

The special appeal was dismissed, thereby upholding the order allowing the writ petition for absorption of the petitioner employee.

State of Raj. and Ors. Vs Manoj Kumar — Education and Admissions | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR

¶3

D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1782/2014

¶4

State of Rajasthan through the Deputy Secretary, Agricultural (Gr. II) Department, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶5

The Director, Department of College Education, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶6

The Financial Advisor, Agricultural, Commissionerate of Agriculture, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶7

The Principal, Swami Kehswanand College, Gramothan Vidhyapeeth, Sangriya, District Hanumangarh.

¶8

----Appellants

¶9

Versus

¶10

Manoj Kumar s/o Tulsi Ram aged about 32 yrs, r/o Valmiki Mohalla, Ward No. 3, Behnind Gurudwara Sangriya, District Hanumangarh.

¶11

----Respondent

¶12

For Appellant(s) : None present. For Respondent(s) : Mr.Mukesh Rajpurohit.

¶13

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶14

Judgment

¶15

03/01/2019

¶16

This special appeal has been preferred by the appellants against the order dated 13.3.2014 passed by learned Single Judge in S.B.Civil writ Petition No.4561/2013, allowing the writ petition filed by the petitioner employee.

¶17

The facts indispensable for the present adjudication are that the petitioner employee was appointed on the post of Farm Sewak (Class-IV cadre) on 21.4.1999 in Swami Keshwanand College, Gramothan Vidyapeeth, Sangariya. He was granted pay

¶18

(2 of 4)

¶19

[SAW-1782/2014]

¶20

scale of ₹ 750-940. The petitioner employee was granted permanent status on 27.2.2004 and was given all benefits of annual grade increments, provident fund etc. The petitioner employee was thereafter given first selection grade on 2.6.2009 and was granted the pay scale of ₹ 2610-3540.

¶21

The State Government framed the Rules known as Rajasthan Voluntary Rural Education Service Rules, 2010 (for short, ‘the Rules of 2010’) to absorb all those employees working in aided non-government educational institutions on aided posts.

¶22

The petitioner employee’s case was recommended for absorption in the government service under the Rules of 2010 but the committee so constituted denied the benefit of absorption to him on the ground that in the service record, the date of birth of the petitioner is mentioned as 5.7.1984 and thus, the petitioner’s appointment was illegal as he was minor.

¶23

Accordingly, the petitioner preferred the aforestated writ petition before this Court which was allowed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 13.3.2014.

¶24

The appellants being aggrieved have preferred this special appeal.

¶25

None is present on behalf of the appellants to argue the appeal.

¶26

Learned counsel for the respondent/writ petitioner employee has shown the certificate dated 17.9.2009 (Annex.1) issued by the State Government under Section 12/17 of the Birth and Death Registration Act, 1969 read with Rule 8 of the Birth and Death Registration Rules, 2000, as per which the date of birth of the petitioner is 15.8.1980.

¶27

(3 of 4)

¶28

[SAW-1782/2014]

¶29

The appellants in their reply to the writ petition have not disputed the correctness of certificate Annex.1 and have preferred this appeal merely on the premise that the petitioner employee was aged 14 years 9 months at the time of his appointment as per his service entry wherein his date of birth was mentioned as 5.7.1984 and the petitioner employee chose not to get it rectified from 1998 till the Rules of 2010 came into vogue and thus, he cannot be absorbed under the Rules of 2010.

¶30

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner employee as well as perusing the record of the case, this court finds that there is no refutal by the appellants to the certificate Annex.1 which has been issued by the appellants themselves in exercise of the powers under Section 12/17 of the Birth and Death Registration Act, 1969 read with Rule 8 of the Birth and Death Registration Rules, 2000, as per which the date of birth of the petitioner is 15.8.1980. This certificate was issued prior to the Rules of 2010 coming into vogue and, therefore, the learned Single Judge was right in holding that the petitioner’s statutory date of birth i.e. 15.8.1980 as declared by the State of Rajasthan was to be accepted. The learned Single Judge further rightly held that the petitioner who was appointed as Farm Sewak being a lowly paid employee, could not be blamed for the wrong entry in the service book which was prepared by the employee of the institution.

¶31

In light of the observations made above, this Court is of the opinion that the appellants have miserably failed to show any reason why the petitioner employee should be denied absorption under the Rules of 2010. The order passed by the learned Single

¶32

(4 of 4)

¶33

[SAW-1782/2014]

¶34

Judge does not suffer from any illegality so as to call for any interference therein.

¶35

Consequently, the present appeal is hereby dismissed.

¶36

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J. (PRADEEP NANDRAJOG),CJ.

¶37

14-SPhophaliya/-

State of Raj. and Ors. v. Manoj Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Raj. and Ors. v. Manoj Kumar

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

Subhash Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

R.S.R.T.C.Jaipur and Anr. Vs Lrs of Vichitra Singh and Anr.

State of Raj. and Ors. Vs Manoj Kumar Jain

State of Raj. and Ors. Vs Ritu Goyal and Anr.

Rajendra Singh Chouhan Vs State of Rajasthan