Remanded

Bhuvan Bhasker S/O Late Shri T.B. Agarwal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC21 Apr 2022SAW/916/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Special Appeal addresses the dismissal of a writ petition challenging the non-conduct of a review Departmental Promotion Competition (DPC). The High Court held that a departmental note-sheet halting the competition was not a mere internal communication but affected the appellant's promotion rights. Consequently, the High Court set aside the Single Judge's order and remanded the matter for a f

What did the court decide?

Set aside the order dated 27/09/2021 and remanded the matter to the learned Single Judge to decide the writ petition afresh.

Bhuvan Bhasker S/O Late Shri T.B. Agarwal… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 916/2021

¶3

Bhuvan Bhasker S/o Late Shri T.b. Agarwal, Aged About 51 Years, Resident Of 801 Deenbandhu Anukampa Residency, D-9A, Kabir Marg, Bani Park, Jaipur - 302016 (Raj.) (Additional Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Udaipur).

¶4

----Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Chief Secretary, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶7

The Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, (Raj.)

¶8

The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, (Raj.)

¶9

Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Indira Gandhi Nahar Bhawan, Bhawani Singh Road, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶10

Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary, Ghooghra Ghati, Ajmer (Raj.)

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Shobhit Tiwari, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Sheetal Mirdha, AAG with Mr. Prateek Singh, Av.

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

¶14

Judgment

¶15

21/04/2022

¶16

By way of present special appeal, the petitioner-appellant has challenged the order dated 27/09/2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in SB Civil Writ Petition No.9983/2021.

¶17

At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant has drawn attention of this Court on the last Paragraph of the order impugned dated 27/09/2021 which is reproduced as under:-

¶18

(2 of 3)

¶19

[SAW-916/2021]

¶20

The claim of the petitioner is found to be without any force for following reasons:-

¶21

“a) Internal communication on a note-sheet can not be a subject matter of challenge in the Court.

¶22

b) secondly, no person has a right of promotion available to him. The only right available is for consideration of promotion. Thus, the petitioner can not seek a direction for conducting a review DPC.

¶23

c) The petitioner has not challenged the earlier review DPC nor he has made any claim against his earlier super-session.”

¶24

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the findings arrived at by the learned Single Judge that the appellant has not challenged the earlier review DPC nor he has made any claim against the earlier super-session are contrary to the facts and pleadings. He submitted that it is on record that the appellant has challenged the order dated 19/08/2020 by which he has been deselected for the post of Additional Chief Engineer in the selection year 2018-19. So, it is incorrect on the part of the learned Singe Judge to hold that the appellant has not challenged the earlier review DPC. Secondly, learned counsel submitted that in the facts and circumstances, the note-sheet dated 05/08/2021 of the Department of Personnel was more than a mere internal communication for taking characteristic of formal order/direction of putting the review DPC on hold and as such, it affects the rights of the appellant to be considered for promotion. He has further submitted that the same is a public document affecting rights of the appellant. Learned counsel further submitted that the appellant has only filed writ petition for seeking his consideration for promotion and retention on the post on which he has been promoted after following regular/due procedure i.e. holding of DPC for the post of Additional Chief Engineer for the year 2018-19 and

¶25

(3 of 3)

¶26

[SAW-916/2021]

¶27

therefore, the learned Single Judge has misdirected itself by holding that the appellant is merely seeking promotion and therefore, the writ petition is without any force.

¶28

Per-contra, learned counsel for the respondents opposed the appeal emphatically but was not able to refute the aforesaid contentions..

¶29

We have considered the order impugned and heard the arguments advanced by the respective counsels. 6. On consideration of the same, we deem it appropriate to set aside the order impugned dated 27/09/2021 passed by the learned Single Judge and remand the matter back to the learned Single Judge to decide the writ petition afresh as the earlier review DPCs were challenged by the petitioner, the note-sheet dated 05/08/2021 is more than an internal communication and affecting rights of the appellant and the present DPC was a review DPC.

¶30

The Special Appeal is accordingly disposed of. All pending application also stand disposed of in above terms.

¶31

(SAMEER JAIN),J

¶32

(PRAKASH GUPTA),J

¶33

Raghu/24

Bhuvan Bhasker S/O Late Shri T.B. Agarwal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhuvan Bhasker S/O Late Shri T.B. Agarwal 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

Harish Kumar Sharma S/O Shri Govind Sahai Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahesh Jhalani S/O Late Shri Raghuvar Dayal Gupta Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramji Lal Kumawat S/O Shri Radhey Shyam Kumawat Vs Income Tax Officer