Allowed

Narottam Lal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC10 Jan 2024CW/723/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan quashed the punishment order dated 14.10.2019 against the petitioner, holding that the Director was not the appropriate authority to pass it as it violated Rule 4(1)(b) of the 2009 Rules. Fresh proceedings were directed.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 14.10.2019 was quashed and set aside; liberty granted to pass a fresh order after adopting complete procedure.

Narottam Lal Vs State of Rajasthan — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2024)

(1 of 2)

[2024:RJ-JD:1457]

[CW-723/2020]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶5

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 723/2020

¶6

Narottam Lal S/o Deva Ram Ji, Aged About 57 Years, R/o Nehru Colony, Falna Station, District Pali.

¶7

----Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Director Cum Joint Secretary, Department Of Local Self, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶10

1. The Municipal Board, Khudala, Falna, District Pali Through Its Executive Officer.

¶11

1. The Municipal Board, Sheoganj, District Sirohi Through Its Executive Officer.

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s)	: Ms. Ayushi Solanki
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Rajesh Parihar,AGC

¶14

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶15

Order

¶16

10/01/2024

¶17

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

¶18

"i) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the charge sheet dated 29.12.2009 (Annex.1), report of the Inquiry Officer dated 27.08.2012 (Annex.3), Order dated 14.10.2019 (Annex.5) and communication dated 30.10.2019 (Annex.7) may kindly be declared illegal and be quashed and set aside. ii) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court considers just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case, may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner

¶19

iii) Costs of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to the petitioner"

¶20

Learned counsel for the respondent, though he opposes on

¶21

merits, fairly submits that Rule 4(1) (a) & (b) of the Rajasthan

[2024:RJ-JD:1457]

[CW-723/2020]

(2 of 2)

Municipalities (Powers, Duties and Functions of Committees) Rules, 2009 shall apply in this matter and to that extent, the authority passing the order was not appropriate.

¶26

The Rule 4(1) (a) & (b) of the Rajasthan Municipalities (Powers, Duties and Functions of Committees), Rules, 2009 reads as under :-

¶27

"4. Powers, duties and function of Committees. (1) The Executive Committee shall exercise, perform and discharge the following powers, duties and functions, namely :-

¶28

(a) Powers, Duties and function under Section 71, 73, 74, 106, 108, 152 to 156, 173 to 176, 198, 199, 240, 241, 255 to 257, 274, 285, 334 and 335 of the Act.

¶29

(b) All matters relating to appointment and disciplinary actions against the employees of the board. "

¶30

On such specific submission, the order passed by the Director for punishing the petitioner is not by the authority prescribed in the rules, thus, the order dated 14.10.2019 is quashed and set aside with liberty to the respondent to pass fresh order strictly in accordance with law after adopting complete procedure.

¶31

In view of above, the writ petition is disposed of. All pending applications also stand disposed of.

¶32

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.

¶33

85-/Jitender/devrajP

Narottam Lal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narottam Lal 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sugan Chand Vs the State of Rajasthan

Ashoka Ram Panwar Vs State of Rajasthan

Chandan Singh Bhati Vs Union of India

Ram Prasad Vs Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Parivahan Marg

Sajjan Singh Vs the State Bank of India

Goverdhan Lal Aahari Vs Smt. Arpana Arora