Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Lokesh Pandya vs State Of Rajasthan & Ors on 20 November, 2017
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15054 / 2017
Lokesh Pandya S/o Kanti Lal Pandya, Aged About 39 Years, R/o
Munged, Tehsil Aspur, District Dungarpur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan Through the Secretary, Department of Rural
& Panchayati Raj, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Rajasthan,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
3. Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner, District- Bikaner,
Rajasthan.
4. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Jalore, Rajasthan.
5. District Establishment Committee Through Its Chairman, Zila
Parishad Jalore Rajasthan.
----Respondents
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahaveer Singh
For Respondent(s) :Mr. Vikas Choudhary, for Mr. SS Ladrecha, AAG
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order 20/11/2017
1. Petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the following reliefs :-
"By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the candidature of the petitioner will not be rejecting the on the ground of being overage may kindly be quashed and set aside.
By an appropriate writ order or directions, the respondents may kindly be directed to grant age relaxation to the petitioner in accordance with the notification dated 23.09.2008 in pursuance of the (2 of 2) [CW-15054/2017] Advertisement year 2013.
By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be restrained from rejecting the application form of the petitioner on the ground of being overage for the post of Teacher Grade -III Level- II.
By an appropraite writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to afford the petitioner appointment on the Teacher Grade III Level II with all consequential benefits.
Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that vide new notification dated 23.09.2008, he has been rendered overage. Learned counsel for the petitioner further states that 2012, no recruitment had taken place and hence, his representation could have been considered for this one year.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent assures this Court that since, 2012 no fresh recruitment was held, therefore, the petitioner's representation shall be considered strictly in accordance with law.
4. The writ petition is disposed of with the directions to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner on the ground that since 2012 no vacancies were advertised and had it been the petitioner would not have been overage.
(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI)J.] sudheer