Allowed

Ravindra Singh Son of Shri Moola Ram v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC8 Dec 2021CW/6174/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order disposed of three connected writ petitions regarding transfer of engineers to vacant posts. The Court allowed the petitions relying on identical precedents, directing respondents to consider transfers and grant consequential benefits.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to be considered for transfer to vacant post of Junior Engineer (Degree Holder) with consequential benefits.

Ravindra Singh Son of Shri Moola Ram Vs the State… — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6174/2020

¶3

Ravindra Singh Son Of Shri Moola Ram, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of Village Mai, Tehsil Nadbai, Bharatpur (Rajasthan).

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Public Health And Engineering Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶7

The Chief Engineer (Administration), Public Health And Engineering Department, Jal Bhawan, Civil Lines, Jaipur.

¶8

The Assistant Engineer, Officer Of The AEN, PHED, SubDivision Deeg, Bharatpur.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

Connected With

¶11

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6596/2020

¶12

Akash Sharma Son Of Shri Nem Chand, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of Village Peepli, Bharatpur (Rajasthan)

¶13

----Petitioner

¶14

Versus

¶15

The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Public Health And Engineering Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶16

The Chief Engineer (Administration), Public Health And Engineering Department, Jal Bhawan, Civil Lines, Jaipur.

¶17

The Assistant Engineer, Officer Of The AEN, PHED, Sub Division Dudu, Jaipur.

¶18

----Respondents

¶19

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6200/2021

¶20

Pawan Sharma S/o Ram Karan Sharma, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Bairawas, Dausa (Rajasthan) Presently Posted At Office Of The AEN, PHED, Jamwa Ramgarh, Jaipur.

----Petitioner

Versus

(2 of 3)

[CW-6174/2020]

The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Public Health And Engineering Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur

¶26

The Chief Engineer (Administration), Public Health And Engineering Department, Jal Bhawan, Civil Lines, Jaipur

¶27

The Assistant Engineer, Officer Of The AEN, PHED, Jamwa Ramgarh, Jaipur

¶28

----Respondents

¶29

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhrigu Sharma with Mr. Shridhar Mehta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anil Mehta, AAG with Ms. Archana

¶30

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL

¶31

Order

¶32

08/12/2021

¶33

All these matters have come up all applications filed by the petitioners to decide the writ petitions in the light of judgment passed by this Court in identical cases.

¶34

In these writ petitions, the petitioners are seeking a direction for the respondents to transfer them to the vacant post of Junior Engineer (Degree Holder) in accordance with Rule 6 (1A) of the Rajasthan Engineering Sub-Ordinate Service (Public Health Branch) Rules, 1967 and to grant them consequential benefits from the date of eligibility.

¶35

Learned for the petitioner submits that the issue involved herein is no more res-integra and stands resolved by this Court. He refers in this regard an order dated 17.09.2021 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in SBCWP No.6199/2021, Man

¶36

Singh Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. and prays that the instant writ petitions may be allowed in similar terms.

¶37

(3 of 3) [CW-6174/2020]

¶38

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents did not dispute the aforesaid factual as well as legal position and submitted that the instant writ petitions may be decided in similar terms.

¶39

Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.

¶40

The writ petition no.6199/2021 was allowed by this Court in

¶41

following terms:

¶42

“In the case of Vimla Devi Saini (supra), it was inter alia directed by this Court as under:-

¶43

“10. In view of the above, the above noted writ petition is allowed with the direction to the respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for transfer in the quota of direct recruitment of Junior Engineer (Degree Holder) by way of transfer in case there is a vacancy and to compute his seniority according to the Rules.”

¶44

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents do not dispute that the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by judgment in the case of Vimla Devi Saini (supra).

¶45

In view of the submissions made, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed in light of and with similar directions as given in the case of Vimla Devi Saini (supra).”

¶46

Taking into consideration the submission advanced by the learned counsels for the respective parties, these writ petitions are allowed with similar directions as given in the case of Vimla Devi

¶47

Saini Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors., SBCWP No.7330/2016 decided on 20.11.2017.

¶48

All pending applications has been disposed of accordingly.

¶49

(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J

¶50

MADAN/18-19 & 29

Ravindra Singh Son of Shri Moola Ram v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravindra Singh Son of Shri Moola Ram v. the 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

Asha Maheshwari Daughter of Indermal Maheshwari Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Vimla Devi (Widow) Wife of Late Santosh Kumar Mahawar Vs the State of Rajasthan

Ankit Meena S/O Ram Das Meena Vs the State of Rajasthan

Abdul Karim S/O Sh. Abdul Rashid Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Satyanarayan Singh S/O Shri Guman Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Pawan Sharma S/O Ram Karan Sharma Vs the State of Rajasthan