Disposed

Karan Singh Son of Shri Shimbhu Dayal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC20 Jan 2021CW/572/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This short order disposes of a writ petition seeking appointment on merit basis. The High Court directs State Authorities to decide petitioner representations within 30 days, pass speaking orders distinguishing relevant precedents, and communicate decisions positively within 7 days. The Court also directs publication of order in newspaper and retention of special leave venue.

What did the court decide?

Directorate of Education to decide representations within 30 days, pass speaking orders distinguishing judgments, and communicate decisions positively within 7 days. Order published in newspaper.

Karan Singh Son of Shri Shimbhu Dayal Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 572/2021

¶3

Karan Singh Son Of Shri Shimbhu Dayal, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Village Dhelawas, Post Gopipura, Tehsil Mundawar, District Alwar (Raj.)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

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

¶7

Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan Bikaner (Raj.)

¶8

District Education Officer, Secondary Education, Bharatpur (Raj.)

¶9

Dy. Secretary, Rajasthan Subordinate And Ministerial Service Selection Board, Jaipur, Rajya Krishi Prabandh Sansthan Parisar, Durgapura Jaipur (Raj.)

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Komal Kumari Giri For Respondent(s) :

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

¶13

Order

¶14

20/01/2021

¶15

The claim of the petitioner is to give him appointment on the

¶16

merits basis.

¶17

In this regard, bunch of writ petitions has been decided on 29.09.2020 by this court in the case of Chandra Shekhar Yadav Versus State of Rajasthan & Othe rs, SBCWP No.7956/2020

¶18

and other connected matters, wherein this court held as under:-

¶19

“This court vide orders dated 4^th August, 2020 and 1^st July, 2020 in similar writ petitions has directed that “the petitioners would be free to submit representation before the concerned authority and if the petitioners submit

¶20

(2 of 3)

¶21

[CW-572/2021]

¶22

representation before the concerning authority, they will decide the same expeditiously as per law”. The matter has come up today and all writ petitions have been jointly tagged.

¶23

Learned Advocate General appears and points out that some of the petitioners have moved representations while some of the petitioners have not moved any representation. It is also stated that certain representations have been allowed while others have been rejected.

¶24

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that they have not received the rejection letters and the reasons are not coming forward for not giving them posting as per their merit.

¶25

I have considered the submissions.

¶26

In all these matters, the grievance of the petitioners is that they are higher in merit in the select list and had opted place of posting of their choice but have been allotted different place of posting while lesser meritorious persons have been given posting of their choice District.

¶27

As the Court has already passed orders for submission of representation to the concerning authority, I deem it appropriate to dispose of these writ petitions with a direction to the State Authorities to decide the representations of the petitioners within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt thereof by passing a speaking order. The relevant judgment passed by the Court from time to time with regard to the maintaining of inter-se seniority and inter-se merit while giving posting was also taken into consideration by the authorities and they will pass a speaking order pointing out and distinguishing the judgment and if they find that case is distinguishable, such an order or decision shall be communicated positively to the concerned petitioner(s) individually within 7 days thereafter.

¶28

It is clarified that if certain representations have already been decided and the judgments passed by this court have not been taken into consideration, then the concerned individual petitioner can file a fresh representation and the same shall be decided in accordance with law.

¶29

If any of the individual person has further grievance remaining, he would be entitled to take up the matter by

¶30

(3 of 3)

¶31

[CW-572/2021]

¶32

approaching appropriate forum after impleading the concerned persons against whom he has a grievance. It is made clear that the decision of the State Government would come within the ambit of service matter and therefore the Service Appellate Tribunal would be an appropriate forum for approaching by filing appeal against any such decision. If any of the appeal is preferred, it is expected from the Tribunal to decide the same expeditiously.

¶33

In view of the observations made hereinabove, these writ petitions stand disposed of.

¶34

This order shall also be applicable to those candidates who have not approached the court as on today. However, the time for filing of representation shall be the same for others also. This order may be published in the newspaper for information to all.”

¶35

Keeping in view above, the present writ petition is also disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶36

All pending applications also stand disposed of.

¶37

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

¶38

Anu /79

Karan Singh Son of Shri Shimbhu Dayal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karan Singh Son of Shri Shimbhu Dayal 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

Dinesh Kumar Sharma S/O Sh. Rambharos Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Aditi Dadhich D/O Shri Ashok Kumar Joshi Vs the State of Rajasthan

Lokesh Kumar Son of Shri Jagratan Vs the Chairman

Kailash Chand Meena Son of Shri Ganga Sahay Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahendra Singh Yadav S/O Late Shivcharan Vs State of Rajasthan

Shri Prabhudayal Meena S/O Shri Natthilal Meena Vs State of Rajasthan