High Court at Jodhpur disposed of a writ petition seeking relief similar to that granted in Suman Jhanwar v. State of Rajasthan. The Court directed petitioners to file representation before the appointing authority.
Disposal of the writ petition with directions to file representation before the appointing authority.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8306/2020
----Petitioners
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shreekant Verma
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
11/09/2020
In wake of onslaught of COVID-19, abundant caution is being taken while hearing the matter in Court.
(2 of 3)
[CW-8306/2020]
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the case of the petitioners is similar to that of petitioners in Suman
Jhanwar & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5405/2012) , decided on 12.02.2015, whereby this Court directed the petitioners to file appropriate representation before the appointing authority and on filing of such representation, the petitioners therein have been granted the requisite relief by the respondents and, therefore, the present petitioners may also be granted similar relief as granted in the case of Suman Jhanwar (supra) .
In the case of Suman Jhanwar (supra) , this Court after hearing the parties, passed the following order:-
“Therefore, the present writ petitions are disposed of with liberty and direction to the petitioners to file appropriate representation with relevant evidence before the appointing authority, who has issued the orders of appointment to the petitioners claiming the same relief, as purportedly given to other similar situated persons. It is expected of the respondent authority to pass speaking orders after providing the opportunity of hearing tot he petitioners or their authorized representative as to why similar benefit cannot be extended to them though others persons have been given such benefits. If, however, any adverse order is passed against the petitioners, the petitioners will be at liberty to avail the legal remedy available to them in accordance with law.”
In view of the submissions as noticed hereinbefore, the writ petition filed by the petitioners is disposed of with the similar directions as given in the case of Suman Jhanwar (supra) .
(3 of 3)
[CW-8306/2020]
The stay petition also stand disposed of.
(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J
231-Sanjay/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioners should be granted relief similar to that granted in Sughan Jhanwar & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Whether the petitioners can file representation before the appointing authority to claim relief purportedly given to others.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Suman Jhanwar & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.Relied on¶21
_Suman Jhanwar & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5405/2012)_
Prem Prakash Meena and Others
State Of Rajasthan
Director, Directorate Of Elementary Education
District Education Officer
Drs. Pushpendra Singh Bhati
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
