Dismissed

Suman v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC16 May 2024CW/758/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought direction to continue working at an earlier posting. The court assigned cause of action but found the petition rendered infructuous as the petitioner had accepted the subsequent posting via letter dated 25.03.2021. The writ petition was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

None. The petition was rendered infructuous due to acceptance of the new posting and disposed of.

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

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:22210]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 758/2019

¶4

Suman D/o Shri Khema Ram, Aged About 27 Years, Vpo Lakhlan Badi, Chalilanabas, Tehsil Sadulpur, District Churu, Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Rural And Panchayati Raj, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶8

The Secretary, Department Of Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶9

The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner, District Bikaner, Rajasthan.

¶10

The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Nagaur, District Nagaur, Rajasthan.

¶11

The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Sriganganagar, District Sriganganagar, Rajasthan.

¶12

The District Education Officer, Elementary Education, Nagaur, District Nagaur, Rajasthan.

¶13

The District Education Officer, Elementary Education, Sriganganagar, District Sriganganagar, Rajasthan.

¶14

----Respondents

¶15

For Petitioner(s)	: Nonepresent.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Lalit Pareek.

¶16

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

¶17

Order

¶18

16/05/2024

¶19

Grievance of the petitioner arises out of an order dated 28.12.2018 (Annex.3), vide which the petitioner was allotted District Sriganganagar as his posting. He sought direction to the respondents to allow him to continue to work at his earlier posting place at District Nagaur.

¶20

[2024:RJ-JD:22210]

¶21

[CW-758/2019]

¶22

While none-appears for the petitioner, on the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents points out that in view of the petitioner having accepted his posting vide his own letter dated 25.03.2021 (Annex.R/2) appended with the reply, the petition is rendered infructuous. That is why, perhaps there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner.

¶23

In view of aforesaid, no further grounds to continue with the proceedings.

¶24

Disposed of.

¶25

Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

¶26

(ARUN MONGA),J

¶27

172-/Jitender//-

Suman v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suman v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.C.,Shri Arorvansh S.D.M.Trust and Anr. Vs Raj.Non-Govt.Edu.Inst.Tribunal,Jpr.Andors.

Soni Bishnoi Vs State of Raj.

Vikram Singh Rajpurohit and Anr. Vs Mohan Lal Sukhadia University and Ors.

Rajeev Vs the State of Rajasthan

Umesh Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Mang.Comm.N.B.S.Secondary School Vs Raj.Non-Govt.Educ.Inst.Trib.Jpr.and Ors.