Allowed

Khemraj S/O Late Shri Maliram v. the Rajasthan High Court

Rajasthan HC6 Feb 2019WRW/59/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court recalled orders dated 7.1.2019 and 18.2019 which were based on an error regarding the recruitment post. The matter pertains to District Judge Cadre, not Civil Judge. The Court allowed the review petition and permitted the petitioner to provisionally appear in the selection examination.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders recalled; writ petition restored; respondent permitted to provisionally appear in District Judge examination subject to Court approval for result declaration.

Khemraj S/O Late Shri Maliram Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

D.B. Civil Review Petition No. 59/2019

¶3

¶4

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5448/2018

¶5

Khemraj S/o Late Shri Maliram, Aged About 41 Years, R/o C-348 (E), Mahesh Nagar, 80 Ft. Road, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶6

----Review Respondent/Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

The Rajasthan High Court, Its Registrar (General), Rajasthan High Court, High Court Building, Jodhpur (Raj.)

¶9

The Registrar (Examination), Rajasthan High Court, High Court Building, Jodhpur (Raj.)

¶10

Review Petitioner/Respondent

¶11

The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶12

----Review Respondent/Respondent

¶13

For Petitioner(s)	:	Shri Vigyan Shah
For Respondent(s)	:	Shri N.K. Maloo, Sr. Advocate with
		Shri Vishnu Bohra

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVERDHAN BARDHAR

¶15

Judgment

¶16

06/02/2019

¶17

This review petition has been filed for recall of the orders of this Court dated 7.1.2019 and 18.1.2019.

¶18

It is contended that the aforesaid order dated 7.1.2019 has been passed on the assumption that the dispute pertains to recruitment to the post of Civil Judge (Jr. Division) and Judicial Magistrate whereas actually the dispute was relating to the recruitment to the post of District Judge Cadre. Subsequently, the

¶19

(2 of 3)

¶20

[WRW-59/2019]

¶21

order aforesaid was corrected on the application of the petitioner on 18.1.2019 directing that the words “Civil Judge (Jr. Division) and Judicial Magistrate” referred in the original order dated 7.1.2019 should be read as “District Judge.”

¶22

Shri N.K. Maloo, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the Rajasthan High Court submits that the dispute in the present case is whether petitioner should be extended the benefit of the amended Rule 12(e) of the Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010. The aforesaid Rule has been amended by notification of the Government dated 27.12.2018 whereas the notification inviting application for recruitment to the cadre of District Judge in this case was issued on 22.9.2018 much prior to that and the last date for submission of the application was 10.10.2018. Therefore the question that was required to be decided is that the amendment which has been brought about subsequently on 27.12.2018, can be applied retrospectively in the case of the petitioner.

¶23

Even though learned counsel for the petitioner argued the matter on merits, but we are satisfied that aforementioned issue has not been examined by the Court on merits and the matter was decided along with several other matters pertaining to the recruitment to the post of Civil Judge (Jr. Division) and Judicial Magistrate. This amounts to error apparent on the face of record. In that view of the matter, the orders dated 7.1.2019 and 18.1.2019 are recalled and the writ petition is restored to its original number and be listed for admission.

¶24

At this stage, learned counsel prays that the petitioner may be permitted to provisionally appear in the selection to the post of District Judge Cadre pursuant to the earlier order passed in the

¶25

(3 of 3)

¶26

[WRW-59/2019]

¶27

writ petition on 4.7.2018 wherefor admit card has also been issued.

¶28

In view of the above, the petitioner is permitted to provisionally appear in the examination for the post of District Judge Cadre, but his result shall not be declared without the permission of the Court.

¶29

The writ petition to come up for admission after two weeks.

¶30

The review petition is accordingly allowed.

¶31

(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR),J

¶32

(MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J

¶33

RS/104

Khemraj S/O Late Shri Maliram v. the Rajasthan High Court

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khemraj S/O Late Shri Maliram v. the Rajasthan High Court

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

Rajasthan Para Medical Council Vs Jayoti Vidayapeeth Womens University

Dr. Manju Saini Wife of Shri K.K. Saini Vs State of Rajasthan through Its Deputy Secretary

Pramod Kumar Kulshreshtha S/O Shri Jeevan Lal Vs Secretary Local Bodies

The State of Rajasthan Vs Balram Verma Son of Shri Devi Singh

Jaipur Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Limited Vs Vidhyut Shramik Karamchari Akta Union (Citu)

Jaipur Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Limited Vs Vidhyut Shramik Karamchari Akta Union (Citu)