Dismissed

Manju Redu v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC5 Feb 2021CW/152/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petitions seeking appointment in specific districts for recruited Physical Training Instructors. The court held selection authorities decide district-wise filling and dismissed pleas relating to merit or vacancies, leaving future representation-based postings pending.

What did the court decide?

No direction granted. Writ petitions dismissed. Request to consider future representations regarding posting is noted.

Manju Redu Vs State of Rajasthan — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 546/2020

¶3

Manju W/o Shri Gourishankar D/o Shri Bajrang Lal, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of Chak 3 Ml, Post 2 Ml, Nathawali, Tehsil And District Sri Ganganagar.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶7

The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner. 3. The District Education Officer (Hq), Secondary Education, Jalore.

¶8

The District Education Officer (Hq), Secondary Education, Sri Ganganagar.

¶9

The District Education Officer (Hq), Secondary Education, Hanumangarh.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

Connected With

¶12

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 152/2020

¶13

Manju Redu D/o Shri Ran Singh, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village B-51, Sainik Colony Sadulpur, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu.

¶14

----Petitioner

¶15

Versus

¶16

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Education Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶17

The Director, Secondary Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Bikaner.

¶18

Joint Director, Secondary Education, Churu.

¶19

Joint Director, Secondary Education, Alwar.

¶20

District Education Officer, Secondary Education (Hq), Churu.

¶21

----Respondents

¶22

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Inderjeet Yadav. Mr. Vikas Bijarnia. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hemant Choudhary.

¶23

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Order

¶24

05/02/2021

¶25

These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners seeking direction to the respondent to provide place of posting to

¶26

(2 of 4)

¶27

[CW-546/2020]

¶28

the petitioners as per their merit position in District – Sri Ganganagar/Hanumangarh/Churu for the post of Physical Training Instructor Grade -III.

¶29

It is inter-alia indicated in the writ petition that pursuant to the recruitment held for Physical Training Instructor Grade -III, 2018, the petitioners were selected. The petitioners indicated their choice of districts, however, they were not allotted the districts of their choice.

¶30

Submissions have been made that while several posts of Physical Teacher Grade-III are lying vacant in the Hanumangarh/Sriganganagar/Churu district, the petitioners have been accorded appointment in district Jalore/Alwar and, therefore, the respondents be directed to accord appointment to the petitioners in the district of their choice.

¶31

A response to the writ petition has been filed by the respondents inter-alia indicating that none of the candidates, who are below the petitioners in their category, have been accorded appointment at district Hanumangarh/Ganganagar/Churu and, therefore, the petitioners cannot seek any mandamus.

¶32

Further submissions have been made by learned counsel for the respondents that merely because certain posts are lying vacant in the district of petitioners’ choice cannot be a reason to accord appointment as the respondents are required to distribute recruited candidates as per the requirement.

¶33

Learned counsel for the petitioners made submissions, in terms of the averments made in the writ petition, inter-alia indicating that though they were higher in merits, persons lower in merit have been accorded appointment in the districts of

¶34

(3 of 4)

¶35

[CW-546/2020]

¶36

petitioners’ choice and, therefore, the action of the respondents cannot be sustained.

¶37

Further submissions have been made that admittedly several posts are lying vacant in the schools at districts of petitioners’ choice. However, they have been kept vacant for no apparent reason and on that count also the respondents be directed to fill up those posts and offer appointment to the petitioners, in case, they stand in merit in their category.

¶38

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. It is not disputed by learned counsel for the petitioners that the candidates who have been accorded appointment at district Sriganganagar/Hanumangarh or Churu, who are lower in merit to the petitioners do not belong to their category and they are in different category i.e. SC/ST, OBC Male Ex-servicemen, OBC Male LDCP category.

¶39

In view, thereof, the plea raised by the petitioners regarding appointment to persons lower in merit has no substance.

¶40

So far as the plea raised regarding vacant positions in the district of petitioners’ choice is concerned, it is indeed for the respondent – State to decide as to from the recruited candidates how many posts are to be filled up in various districts and the petitioners cannot seek a mandamus from this Court to get filled up post in particular districts so as to deprive the other districts of the selected candidates.

¶41

In view thereof, no case for interference is made out in the present writ petition.

¶42

The same is therefore, dismissed.

¶43

(4 of 4)

¶44

[CW-546/2020]

¶45

However, in case petitioners make any representation to the respondents seeking posting at districts of their choice on any ground other than what has been raised in the present petition the same may be considered on their own merit.

¶46

(ARUN BHANSALI),J

¶47

2-pradeep/-

Manju Redu v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manju Redu 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mamta Kumari Vs State of Rajasthan

Ganpat Das Vs State of Rajasthan

Ashwini Kumar Paliwal Vs State of Rajasthan

Dr. Sanjay Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Suresh Kumar Damor Vs State of Rajasthan

Fahli Ram Meena Vs Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.