Dismissed

Deepak Bhargav Son of Late Shri G.L. Bhargav v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC25 May 2023SAW/461/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Acting Chief Justice and a Justice dismissed a special appeal filed by State Insurance Department employees challenging a building reconstruction. The court held the appellants lacked locus standi as their service terms were unaffected. Liberty to file PIL was denied; the validity issue was left open.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is dismissed. Liberty to file PIL is denied. The issue regarding correctness and validity of construction is left open.

Deepak Bhargav Son of Late Shri G.L. Bhargav Vs State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[2023/RJJP/011909]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 461/2023

¶4

¶5

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9538/2022

¶6

Deepak Bhargav Son Of Late Shri G.l. Bhargav, Aged About 60 Years, R/o 204, Jagdish Puri, Near Hindustan School, Dhawas Road, Heerapura Jaipur.

¶7

Ramkishor Meena Son Of Shri Jagdish Prasad Meena, Aged About 44 Years, R/o 193, Santosh Sagar Colony, Brahampuri Jaipur.

¶8

Harinarayan Yadav Son Of Shri Nanag Ram Yadav, Aged About 60 Years, R/o 29A, Phool Colony, Choudhary Petrol Pump Ke Pass, Thana Circle, Sanganer, Tonk Road Jaipur .

¶9

Chhotelal Meena Son Of Shri Ghansi Ram Meena, Aged About 57 Years, R/o Surajpura Ghati, Terminal-2, Near Airport, Jaipur.

¶10

Man Singh Shekhawat Son Of Shri Bhanwar Singh, Aged About 54 Years, R/o 148, Telipada, Nayi Pani Ki Tanki, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur.

¶11

Dileep Singh Rajawat Son Of Late Shri Lallu Singh, Aged About 50 Years, R/o 16, Shanti Nagar, Gurjar Ki Thadi, New Sanganer Road, Jaipur.

¶12

Prem Shankar Bhardwaj Son Of Shri Mahaveer Prasad, Aged About 57 Years, R/o 6A, Vishv Nagar, New Sanganer Road, Sodala, Jaipur.

¶13

Smt. Sunita Choudhary W/o Shri Mahendra Kumar, Aged About 42 Years, R/o 155, Pawanputra D Colony, Panchyawala, Jaipur.

¶14

Himanshu Yadav Son Of Shri Late Ram Niwas Yadav, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Prem Colony, Sanganer Thana Circle, Jaipur.

¶15

Vijendra Verma Son Of Shri Kaluram Verma, Aged About 58 Years, R/o B-44A, Sundar Vihar Colony, Swej Farm, Sodala Jaipur.

¶16

Mahesh Sharma Son Of Late Shri Kapoor Chand Sharma, Aged About 41 Years, R/o D-15, Govindpuri Colony, Ramnagar Sodala, Jaipur.

(2 of 3)

[2023/RJJP/011909]

[SAW-461/2023]

Raghvendra Singh Son Of Late Shri Ashok Singh Rathore, Aged About 40 Years, R/o 104, Mahadev Nagar, Chitrkoot, Jaipur.

¶21

Sandeep Mathur Son Of Late Shri Yogendra Prasad Mathur, Aged About 45 Years, R/o 2354, Near Gyanoday School, Raja Shiv Das Ka Rasta, Nahargarh Road, Chndpole Bazar, Jaipur Rajasthan.

¶22

Sarvdaman Maurya Son Of Late Shri Nand Kishor Maurya, Aged About 45 Years, R/o A-236, Mahesh Nagar, Ward No.15, Jaipur.

¶23

Anurag Soni Son Of Shri Satish Soni, Aged About 30 Years, R/o A-18, Maharana Pratap Road, Panchyawala, Jaipur.

¶24

----Appellants

¶25

Versus

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

The Director State Insurance And Provident Funds Department, Banipark Jaipur Rajasthan

¶29

General Administrative Department, Through Principal Secretary, Jaipur.

¶30

----Respondents

¶31

For Appellant(s) : Mr. R.N. Mathur, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Shovit Jhajharia, Advocate

¶32

HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

Judgment / Order

25/05/2023

Heard.

This appeal is directed against the order passed by learned Single Judge in a writ petition filed by the employees of the State

¶37

[2023/RJJP/011909]

¶38

[SAW-461/2023]

¶39

Insurance Department falling in question construction and reconstruction of the building.

¶40

The appellants, in our view, have no locus standi to challenge the construction/reconstruction of the building as none of the terms and conditions of their services have been affected.

¶41

At this stage, learned Senior Counsel submits that appellants may be granted liberty to file PIL. The appellants, being employees, could not be granted any such liberty. The issue with regard to correctness and validity of construction is left open.

¶42

The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶43

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶44

(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACTING CJ

¶45

Mohita /12

Deepak Bhargav Son of Late Shri G.L. Bhargav v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Bhargav Son of Late Shri G.L. Bhargav 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

Prem Prakash, Son of Shri Shivji Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh Kumar S/O Sh. Sultan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

The State of Rajasthan Vs Ram Kishore Meena S/O Shri Hari Narain Meena

Bharatraj S/O Shri Moolchand Vs Rohitash S/O Shri Bansi

Jagdish Kumar S/O Bhanwar Lal Vs Assistant Commissioner State Commercial Tax Department

Smt. Champa Devi W/O Late Ex. Sep Anji Singh No. 2643511 Vs Union of India