Disposed

Dr. Meeta Gupta W/O Arvind Agrawal v. the Jaipur National University

Rajasthan HC18 Sept 2021CW/8396/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner doctor approached High Court for relieving orders, experience certificate, and unpaid salary. Court disposed petition by directing respondents to decide pending representations via speaking order within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents No.1 and 2 to decide pending representations by way of speaking order within two weeks.

Dr. Meeta Gupta W/O Arvind Agrawal Vs the Jaipur… — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8396/2021

¶3

Dr. Meeta Gupta W/o Arvind Agrawal, Aged About 51 Years, R/o 4, Moti Nagar, Gurjar Ki Thadi, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The Jaipur National University, Through Its Principal And Controller, Jagatpura, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶7

The Registrar, Jaipur National University, Jagatpura, Jaipur (Raj)

¶8

National Medical Commission Of India, Through Chairperson, Pocket-14, Sector-8, Dwarka Phase-1 New Delhi - 110077

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Chitra Goel. For Respondent(s) :

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Order

¶12

18/09/2021

¶13

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to issue relieving order, experience certificate and salary for the month of December-2020, January– 2021 and February–2021 alongwith security deposit.

¶14

Submissions have been made that though the contract of the petitioner with the respondent – hospital came to an end, despite the same, the requisites are not being issued and the due salary has not been paid to the petitioner. The petitioner after making repeated representations, got issued a notice also from the counsel in this regard, however, the respondents have failed to respond to the representations / notice from the counsel.

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

[CW-8396/2021]

¶17

In the circumstances of the case, where the petitioner has made various representations and got a notice issued from the counsel, it is minimum requirement for the respondents to respond to the said representations / notice.

¶18

In that view of the matter, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of. The respondents No.1 and 2 are directed to decide the pending representations of the petitioner by way of a speaking order within a period of two weeks from the date a copy of this order is placed by the petitioner with the said authorities.

¶19

The petitioner would be free to file a fresh detailed representations, if so advised.

¶20

(ARUN BHANSALI),J

¶21

SUMIT SHARMA /19

Dr. Meeta Gupta W/O Arvind Agrawal v. the Jaipur National University

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Meeta Gupta W/O Arvind Agrawal v. the Jaipur National University

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

Rahul Sharma S/O Shri Prahlad Kumar Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Padam Chand Jain S/O Shri Kapoor Chand Jain Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhoovnesh Kumar Chaudhary Son of Shri Vijay Singh Chaudhary Vs State of Rajasthan

Ajay Singh Dhayal S/O Sardar Singh Dhayal Vs the State of Rajasthan

Vishram Gurjar Son of Shri Sundaram Gurjar Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajesh Dhanopia S/O Shri Hari Shankar Ji Dhanopia Vs the Principal Secretary