The High Court held that as the present matter is squarely covered by a precedential order in Surendra Singh concerning non-application of mind in service matters, no case for interference is made out.
The writ petition was dismissed as it had no substance in light of the precedent Surendra Singh.
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 BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18096/2018
----Petitioners
Versus
Shri Banshi Lal Son Of Ram Lal Sain, Aged About 52 Years, Post Baran Tehsil Banera At Present Resident Of Bhilwadia Bhawan, Gurjaron K Hathai Kothia Tehsil Shahpura District Bhilwara
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Archana. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amitosh Pareek.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI
Order
06/09/2021
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against the order dated 02.11.2017 passed by the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur, whereby, the appeal filed by the respondent has been allowed.
Learned counsel for the respondent submits that in similar nature matter, one Surendra Singh approached principal seat at Jodhpur by filing Civil Writ Petition No.7638/2009 (Surendra Singh v. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.), which came to be decided by
(2 of 2)
[CW-18096/2018]
order dated 15.09.2016 and the present matter is squarely covered by order in the said case.
In the case of Surendra Singh (Supra) the Court inter-alia came to the following conclusion:-
"Thus evidently, the respondent authorities could not have inflicted the petitioner with this dual adversity i.e. cancellation of promotion as well as withdrawal of the selection scales. The order (Annexure-6) dated23.06.2009 apparently was passed with total non-application of mind to the facts available on record and cannot be sustained.
Consequently, the writ petition deserves to be and is hereby allowed. The order (Annexure-6) dated23.06.2009 is declared to be illegal and is hereby quashed and set aside. It is however made clear that the respondents, if so advised, shall be entitled to make appropriate refixation of the petitioner after taking into account the totality of facts available on record. Stay application stands disposed of.
No order as to costs. "
Learned counsel for the petitioner is not in position to dispute the fact that the decision made in the case of Surendra Singh(Supra) is similar to that of the present case.
In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, no case for interference in the order impugned in light of order in the case of Surendra Singh (Supra) is made out.
The petition has no substance. The same is, therefore, dismissed.
(ARUN BHANSALI),J
7-PRADEEP KUMAR LIMBA /686
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can interfere with the order of the Appellate Tribunal where the matter is covered by a similar precedent allowing the appeal.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Surendra Singh v. The State of RajasthanReferred¶16
Shurendra Singh v. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.
State Of Rajasthan
Shri Banshi Lal Son Of Ram Lal Sain
Arun Bhansali
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
