Allowed

State and Ors. v. Smt. Seema Parihar

Rajasthan HC2 Feb 2022SAW/835/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench allowed the State's appeal to modify the lower court's order regarding the petitioner's appointment. The court directed authorities to consider the petitioner based on merit and grant consequential benefits except back wages for the past period, applying the 'Firdos Tarannum' modification principle.

What did the court decide?

State authorities shall consider the petitioner for appointment to the post in question according to her merit position and grant consequential benefits except back wages for the past period.

State and Ors. Vs Smt. Seema Parihar — Education and Admissions | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 835/2006

¶3

The State of Rajasthan through the Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶4

The Director, Primary Education Rajasthan, Bikaner.

¶5

The District Education Officer, (Primary), Nagaur.

¶6

----Appellant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Smt. Seema Parihar W/o Shri Mazipur Rahaman D/o Shri Ayub Ali Parihar, resident of Polot No.89, Outer Singnal Indira Colony, Nagaur.

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Manish Vyas, AAG through V.C. For Respondent(s) : None present.

¶11

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

¶12

Order

¶13

02/02/2022

¶14

This appeal is filed by the State to challenge the judgment dated 19.05.2005 passed by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1726/2005. The learned Single Judge had relied on the decision in the case of Altaf Bano Vs. State and Others (DB Civil Appeal No.285/2004 – decided on 06.04.2005) in order to allow the petition by upholding the educational qualification of the petitioner for the purpose of appointment on the post of Teacher Grade-III Urdu (Minority Language) in Government schools.

¶15

The issue is squarely covered by the Division Bench judgment in the case of State of Rajasthan and Others V/s. Miss Firdos Tarannum (D.B. Civil Special Appeal (W)

(2 of 2)

[SAW-835/2006]

Following

No.534/2005 – decided on 12.01.2022) .

¶20

observations may be noted:

¶21

“Under the circumstances, we do not find that the learned Single Judge committed any error. We may record that in view of the conflict between the two decisions of the Division Benches of this Court in the cases of Altaf Bano (supra) and Firdos Tarannum (supra), a reference was made to the larger bench. In Firdos Tarannum (supra) Supreme Court has remanded the proceedings before this Court and which are now being decided by this judgment which in any case is not in conflict with the view expressed in the case of Altaf Bano(supra). The reference to the larger bench would therefore become one of no consequence.

¶22

The learned Single Judge while disposing of the writ petition had directed the State authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on the post of Teacher Grade-III Urdu (minority language) pursuant to the said advertisement dated 07.11.2000 and if appointed she would be granted all consequential benefits. Several years have passed and the litigation remained pending at one stage or the other. We do not think that the State exchequer should be burdened with the payment of idle wages for the past period to the petitioner even if she were to be appointed. Under the circumstances, while disposing of this appeal, the judgment of the learned Single Judge is modified by holding that the State authorities shall consider the petitioner for appointment to the post in question according to her merit position and if appointed, she shall be granted all consequential benefits except back wages for the past period. In other words, the petitioner would have the benefit of seniority for the past period from the date the person below the petitioner in merit list was appointed.

¶23

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.”

¶24

Under the circumstances, the appeal is disposed of along the same line. The modification as provided in the said order regulated the past period will apply in the present case also.

¶25

With these observations and directions, the appeal is disposed of.

¶26

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J

¶27

(AKIL KURESHI),CJ

¶28

143-a.asopa/-

State and Ors. v. Smt. Seema Parihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State and Ors. v. Smt. Seema Parihar

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

Shobha Vs State of Rajasthan

Deendayal Bang Vs Union of India

State of Rajasthan Vs Gaj Singh Mehta

Doula Ram Vs Union of India

Gomi Vs State of Rajasthan

Oman Singh Rawat Vs State of Rajasthan