Disposed

Kanti Lal Parmar v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC29 Sept 2021CW/13651/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the petitioner to file a representation for redressal of posting grievance within a week. Pending decision, the petitioner was permitted to continue duties at the present posting. The writ petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to submit representation within a week; imperative not to disturb existing posting pending decision; writ petition disposed of.

Kanti Lal Parmar Vs State of Rajasthan — Education and Admissions | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13651/2021

¶3

Kanti Lal Parmar S/o Shri Babu Lal Parmar, Aged About 26 Years, Resident Of Chandpura, Narana, District Udaipur (Raj.).

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Education Department, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.).

¶7

Director, Elementary Education And Panchayatiraj Department, Rajasthan Bikaner (Raj.).

¶8

Director, Secondary Education Bikaner (Raj.).

¶9

District Education Officer (Head Quarter), Secondary Education, Udaipur (Raj.).

¶10

District Education Officer, Elementary Education, Udaipur (Raj.).

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. O.P. Sangwa. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vishal Jangid, Dy. G.C. for Mr. Hemant Choudhary, G.C. Mr. G.S. Chouhan for Mr. K.K. Bissa.

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

¶14

Order

¶15

29/09/2021

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that the controversy involved in this writ petition is akin to one decided by this Court in bunch of cases led by Prem Bai Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : SB Civil Writ Petition No.11136/2017 decided by Jaipur Bench on 24.07.2017.

¶17

Learned counsel for the respondents, is not in a position to dispute the aforesaid position of facts and law.

¶18

(2 of 2)

¶19

[CW-13651/2021]

¶20

The petitioner is directed to furnish a representation in light of guidelines dated 24.08.2021 or any other applicable guideline/circular before the concerned District Education Officer within a period of one week, along with photo-stat copy of the guideline/circular and certified copy of the order instant. The petitioner may also point out any vacant post in his district and judgment, which he wishes to rely upon.

¶21

In case, a representation is so addressed within the aforesaid period, the competent authority of respondent shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law as early as possible, preferably within a period of two weeks.

¶22

Until petitioner’s representation is decided, the petitioner shall be permitted to discharge his duties at present place of posting (before passing of the impugned order).

¶23

It is made clear that aforesaid direction to decide there presentation has been issued only with a view to ensure expeditious redressal of petitioner’s grievance. The same may not be construed to be an order to decide the representation in a particular manner.

¶24

The writ petition as well as stay application stand disposed of accordingly.

¶25

175-Sumit/-

Kanti Lal Parmar v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanti Lal Parmar v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Devendra Singh Rao Vs State of Rajasthan

Harshit Kalal Vs State of Rajasthan

Virendra Kumar Jain Vs State of Rajasthan

Urmila Sihag Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhoop Singh Choudhary Vs State of Rajasthan

Hansraj Bhati Vs State of Rajasthan