Disposed

Kana Ram Garg v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC28 Aug 2023CW/3950/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Jodhpur disposed of a writ petition by directing the petitioner to file a representation concerning the apprehension of disengagement from contract services for Healthcare guidance, to be decided by the respondents within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

The court directed the petitioner to file a representation to the respondents which shall be taken up by the respondents within eight weeks of receipt of same.

Kana Ram Garg Vs State of Rajasthan — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3950/2023

¶3

Kana Ram Garg S/o Shri Manga Ram, Aged About 30 Years, B/c Meghwal (Sc), R/o Rohat, District Pali. Presently Working As Swasthya Margdarshak (Health Guider) In The Office Of Community Health Centre (Chc), Rohat, District Pali.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

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

¶7

The Director (Public Health), Medical And Health Services, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶8

The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Pali.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahipaal Rajpurohit For Respondent(s) :

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

¶12

Order

¶13

28/08/2023

¶14

Petitioner’s grievance is that he was working on contract basis under the respondents, and they are apprehending disengagement of his services.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would feel satisfied if the respondents are directed to consider his representation (which he would be filing) in light of the judgment of this Court dated 19.01.2021, passed in Jai Prakash Ganchi & Ors. Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.(S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.7273/2020) and also in light of circular dated 02.09.2020.

¶16

The present writ petition is, therefore, disposed of with the direction to the petitioner to file a representation, while enclosing

¶17

(2 of 2) [CW-3950/2023]

¶18

photostat copy of the judgment in the case of Jai Prakash Ghanchi (supra) and photostat copy of the circular dated 02.09.2020 within a period of four weeks from today.

¶19

In case, representation is so addressed, the competent authority shall do the needful, in accordance with law, preferably within a period of eight weeks from receipt thereof.

¶20

It is made clear that aforesaid direction to decide the representation has been issued only with a view to ensure expeditious redressal of petitioner’s grievance. The same may not be construed to be an order to decide the representation in a particular manner.

¶21

The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶22

The order has been passed based on the submissions made in the petition, the respondents would be free to examine the veracity of the submissions made in the petition and only in case, the averments made therein are found to be correct, the petitioner would be entitled to the relief.

¶23

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

¶24

226-/Vivek/-

Kana Ram Garg v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kana Ram Garg 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manohar Singh Rathore Vs State of Rajasthan

Umraw Singh Rathore Vs State of Rajasthan

Hasamdeen Vs State of Rajasthan

Kailash Singh Rajpurohit Vs Managing Director

Maina Vs State of Rajasthan

Aaved Hassan Vs the State of Rajasthan