Allowed

Pushpa Poonia v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC1 Feb 2023CW/290/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan directed the respondents to honor the petitioner's initial appointment as PTI Grade-III instead of the subsequently upgraded post of PTI Grade-II, allowing her to continue in her original role with all benefits.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to continue as PTI Grade-III with all consequential benefits and treatment of the appointment order dated 05.06.2016 as final.

Pushpa Poonia Vs State of Rajasthan — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJD/003272]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 290/2020

¶4

Pushpa Poonia D/o Indraj Poonia W/o Mohan Lal, Aged About 32 Years, Village Chak Kera, Post Lalgarh Jattan, Tehsil Sardulshahar, District Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶8

Director, Secondary Education Department, Bikaner, Rajasthan.

¶9

District Education Officer, Secondary, Sriganganagar, Rajasthan.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s)	:	Dr. Nikhil Dungawat
		Ms. Pushpa Poonia (present in person)
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Sharwan Kumar, AGC
		Mr. Vikram Singh for Mr. Tarun Joshi

¶12

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI Order

¶13

01/02/2023

¶14

The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition claiming the following reliefs :-

¶15

"(A) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the Respondent may kindly be directed to implement the appointment order dated 06.04.2017 (Annex.-03) and she may be given appointment on the post of PTI Grade-II with all consequential benefits and service benefits.

¶16

(B) In an alternative to the aforementioned prayer, by an appropriate writ order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to allow continuing to remain

(2 of 4)

[2023/RJJD/003272]

[CW-290/2020]

the Petitioner on post of PTI Grade III and her services may be regularized with all consequential benefits as she has already completed her probation period."

¶21

The brief facts as noticed by this Court are that the petitioner was appointed as PTI Grade-III in pursuance of the advertisement issued in year 2013 and a common selection process were made by the respondents for PTI Grade-III and II in pursuance of the said advertisement. The petitioner is continuing on this appointment and discharging her duties on the post of PTI GradeIII even till today without any break. The respondents due to their own reasons, conducted a re-shuffling of the result on 06.04.2017, which resulted into the petitioner being upgraded to PTI Grade-II vide office order dated 06.04.2017. After that, the petitioner gave a representation on 16.07.2018 to the respondents stating therein that she may be allowed to discharge her duty on the post of PTI Grade III instead of PTI Grade II, which was on count of her conducive place of posting, as where she was discharging her duties as PTI Grade III, her in-laws and matrimonial family were residing, for that reason, she prompted to choose PTI Grade III instead of a higher post of PTI Grade-II. The communication was going on between the respondents and petitioner, but no firm and effective decision was taken by the respondents in that regard.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner Dr. Nikhil Dungawat, who has identified the petitioner, who is present in person before this Court and who has categorically stated that due to her in-laws family and her matrimonial life, she wishes to stay at PTI GradeIII for the placement granted and thus, prays that she may be permitted to continue as PTI Grade-III.

(3 of 4)

[2023/RJJD/003272]

[CW-290/2020]

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the neither the petitioner was relieved from the post of PTI Grade-III nor any order was passed in this regard.

¶27

Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the reshuffle has caused confusion and because of that, the petitioner who was originally appointed in year 2016 as PTI Grade-III, was to be moved to PTI Grade-II in year 2017. Learned counsel for the respondents admits that the petitioner is in continuous employment as PTI Grade-III since 05.06.2016 till today, but at the same time, opposes the petition on the ground of nonavailability of the vacant post of PTI Grade-III, at the place where the petitioner seeks to discharge her duties in the said capacity.

¶28

This Court, after hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record of the case, is of the firm opinion that that the petitioner was qualified and appointed for the post of PTI in pursuance of the advertisement issued in year 2013; her grade was initially Grade-III, but for no fault of her, a re-shuffle was made and she was upgraded to PTI Grade-II. The PTI Grade-II was not acceptable to her and in this regard, she submitted a representation to allow the respondent to continue her at PTI Grade-III and her probation has been completed on 07.06.2018, but due to the on-going litigation, her confirmation is yet to come. 7. In the given facts and circumstance, the respondents are directed to abide by their original order of appointment, which was issued by them on 05.06.2016 whereby the petitioner was given appointment as PTI Grade-III at serial no.31. It is directed that the appointment order dated 05.06.2016 shall be treated as a final order, as the respondents has acquiesced their rights by not

(4 of 4)

[2023/RJJD/003272]

[CW-290/2020]

relieving the petitioner, moreover, the petitioner also does not want to join the post of PTI Grade-II; she was not responsible for the reshuffling and her representation also should have been considered, but at this belated stage, when she has already completed her service about six years, it is appropriate to allow the writ petition and the petitioner shall be given all benefits in accordance with the appointment letter issued on 05.06.2016, where her name has been shown at serial no.31 for PTI Grade-III, from the initial date of appointment, within a period of three months from today.

¶33

All pending applications stand disposed of.

¶34

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.

¶35

216-Sudheer/-

Pushpa Poonia v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pushpa Poonia 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

Bheru Lal Kumawat Vs State of Rajasthan

Padam Singh @ Pradeep Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Prathvi Singh Vs the State of Rajasthan

Hanuman Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Madan Lal Bhatt Vs Shri Rajeshwar Singh

Mehram Fardoda Vs State of Rajasthan