Dismissed

Lalta Prasad v. Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan

Rajasthan HC24 Jan 2024CW/1071/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition by a school teacher challenging a Central Administrative Tribunal order that rejected his claim to treat a period of absence as duty. The Court found the Tribunal correct in noting the petitioner had been relieved and not worked at the new post, and could not claim duty time while awaiting transfer. Also rejected the fresh prayer for station change due to l

What the court decided

AI extract

Lalta Prasad Vs Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:3786-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1071/2024

¶4

Lalta Prasad S/o Shri Babu Ram, Aged About 54 Years, R/o Plot No. 5, Khasra No. 58, Roop Nagar, Nanar Road, Nandari Jodhpur, (Raj.) (Posted As Pgt Chemistry At Kendriya Vidyalaya No. 1 Army, Jodhpur) (Posted As Pgt Chemistry At Kendriya Vidyalaya No. 1 Army, Jodhpur)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, Through The Commissioner, 18, Institutional Area, Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, New Delhi 110016.

¶8

The Assistant Commissioner (Estt.-Ii/iii), Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, 18, Institutional Area, Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, New Delhi 110016.

¶9

The Deputy Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (R.o.), 92, Gandhi Nagar Marg, Bajaj Nagar, Jaipur 302016.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jog Singh Bhati

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI Order

¶13

24/01/2024

¶14

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 08.12.2023 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur (for short ‘the Tribunal’), whereby the original application filed by the petitioner challenging the action of the respondents of not treating his period of non-joining as period spent on duty, has been rejected.

¶15

The petitioner was working on the post of Teacher (Chemistry) in Kendriya Vidhyalaya No.1, Army, Jodhpur and he was transferred to Kendriya Vidhyalaya, BSF Pokaran vide order dated 03/04.08.2023. The petitioner approached the Tribunal by way of filing OA and challenged the validity of the transfer order

[2024:RJ-JD:3786-DB]

[CW-1071/2024]

(2 of 3)

dated 03/04.08.2023, however during pendency of the OA before the Tribunal, the petitioner was relieved and was directed to join at Kendriya Vidhyalaya, BSF Pokaran. The OA filed by the petitioner came to be disposed of by the Tribunal vide order dated 11.08.2023 with liberty to him to apply directly to the competent respondent authority ventilating his grievances and articulating his respective prayer with regard to transfer at the place of his choice.

¶20

At the insistence of the petitioner, the Tribunal has further ordered that the respondent authorities shall not pass any order prejudicial to the petitioner to join at the place of posting till disposal of his representation.

¶21

The representation filed by the petitioner came to be disposed of by the respondent authorities vide order dated 27/30.10.2023 and the petitioner was transferred to Kendriya Vidyalaya, BSF Pokhran and simultaneously he was asked to submit a leave application to treat the period of his absence from duty as period spent on duty.

¶22

Being aggrieved with the same, the petitioner approached the Tribunal by way of filing another OA, which came to be dismissed by the Tribunal vide order dated 08.12.2023. The Tribunal is of the view that the period which the petitioner did not work cannot be treated as the period spent on duty. It is observed by the Tribunal that the petitioner himself did not join his duties at his respective place of posting and awaited for the decision on his representation and, therefore, he cannot claim that the said period may be treated as the period spent on duty.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Tribunal has erred in observing that the period from which the

[2024:RJ-JD:3786-DB]

[CW-1071/2024]

(3 of 3)

petitioner has not joined his duties cannot be treated as the period spent on duty because as per the order passed by the Tribunal in the earlier OA, he was protected from joining at the new place of posting and, in such circumstances, the respondents cannot compel him to file leave application for treating the period of absence from duty.

¶28

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record.

¶29

Though, it is true that the Tribunal while deciding the earlier OA filed by the petitioner has observed that the respondents shall not compel him to join at the new place of posting till disposal of his representation, but the fact remains that prior to passing of the order by the Tribunal, the petitioner was already relieved. Admittedly, the petitioner did not work at the new place of posting after relieving and, in such circumstances, we don’t find any illegality in the impugned order dated 08.12.2023 passed by the Tribunal.

¶30

In the writ petition, the petitioner has also prayed that the respondents may be directed to issue modification of the transfer order to the choice station of the petitioner i.e. Delhi, however, the said plea also cannot be entertained as no such prayer was claimed by the petitioner before the Tribunal.

¶31

In view of the above discussion, this writ petition being devoid of merit is hereby dismissed.

¶32

(RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI),J

¶33

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶34

41-Arun/-

Lalta Prasad v. Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Lalta Prasad v. Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mukesh Bhartia Vs Marwar Gramin Bank

Mukesh Bhartia Vs Marwar Gramin Bank

Mukesh Bartia Vs Bikaner Kshetriya Gramin Bank

Chanda Kanwar Vs State of Rajasthan

Sharvan Nath Sidh Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajni Kardam Vs Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan