Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Poonam Chand Bhandari Son Of Late Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 20 October, 2021
Bench: Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, Farjand Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Writ (PIL) Petition No. 8053/2019
Dr. Chetna Yadav W/o Shri S.k. Yadav, Aged About 38 Years,
Resident Of 5, Ganesh Colony, Tonk Road Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Government Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, School
Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. Board Of Secondary Education Of Rajasthan, Through Its
Secretary Board Of Secondary Education Rajasthan,
Ajmer.
----Respondents
Connected With D.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 904/2020 Poonam Chand Bhandari Son Of Late Shri Rikhab Raj Bhandari, Aged About 65 Years, Resident Of A-14, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur.
----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Finance, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Shri Niranjan Arya, Ex-Additional Chief Secretary-Finance (Presently Posted As Chief Secretary, Government Of Rajasthan), Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. Shri Akhil Arora, Principal Secretary, Department Of Finance, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
4. Smt. Aparna Arora, Principal Secretary, Secondary Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Poonam Chand Bhandari, Advocate with Dr. T.N. Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Singhvi, Advocate General with Mr. Siddhant Jain, Advocate (Downloaded on 23/10/2021 at 10:15:47 PM) (2 of 4) [CW-8053/2019] Mr. Sheetanshu Sharma, Advocate Mr. S.S. Raghav, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Ajay Singh Rajawat, Advocate HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI Judgment / Order 20/10/2021 By way of this PIL, the petitioner has sought direction to respondents to make efficient and permanent arrangements of computer facilities in the larger interest of students, who are studying in Government Schools in the State of Rajasthan.
Taking into consideration the cause as espoused by the petitioner, we issued direction in the matter in response to which the State, from time to time, has come out with the steps- initiatives taken by it to ensure computer facilities and related infrastructure in Government Schools. Lastly, an affidavit has been filed today and in that affidavit, elaborate statement has been made with regard to the development taken so far towards development of necessary infrastructure, rule making, recruitment etc. Among other things, it has been stated in the affidavit that 11674 computer labs have been established in the secondary and higher secondary schools. However, a proposal still stands under which, 960 more schools have to be equipped with similar facilities. Learned Advocate General referring to the averments made in the affidavit has also brought attention of this Court to the fact that recruitment on 9862 posts of Basic Computer Instructor and 591 posts of Senior Computer Instructor have already been sanctioned. Document to that effect has also been (Downloaded on 23/10/2021 at 10:15:47 PM) (3 of 4) [CW-8053/2019] placed on record. Moreover, a decision has been taken to deploy the Science Teachers, who are having certificate of computer course of RS-CIT and a direction, issued in this regard, has already been placed before us. Moreover, draft rules, which have been made for the regular recruitment on the posts of Basic Computer Instructor and Senior Computer Instructor, has already been intimated to the Staff Selection Board as reflected vide communication dated 18.10.2021. The scheme of examination as well as syllabus has also been forwarded to Staff Selection Board. We however, find that the rules have not been finalised till date.
Unless the rules are finalised, we are afraid, the process of recruitment may not be completed at the earliest.
Learned Advocate General states that necessary steps shall be taken to ensure that the rules are finalized at the earliest. We have no reason to disbelieve the statement so made by learned Advocate General.
In view of the steps, which have so far been taken by the State, as reflected from the affidavit filed before us, at this stage, we are of the view that the purpose of filing of this PIL stands fulfilled, though some of the steps are yet to be taken. What so far has been done is clearly stated in the affidavit. Learned Advocate General assured that the steps towards finalisation of the rules and recruitment would be completed at the earliest. In our view, this PIL at this stage has to be disposed off.
The part of the process of recruitment, which is yet incomplete, should be completed at the earliest. Keeping in view the fact that the draft rules are in the pipeline and some time may be consumed for finalization, we are inclined to direct the State to complete the process within an outer limit of four months. (Downloaded on 23/10/2021 at 10:15:47 PM)
(4 of 4) [CW-8053/2019] Needless to mention that steps for ensuring completion of process of recruitment before time allotted by this Court, may also be adopted by the State.
The petitioner would be at liberty to revive the petition, in case, the recruitment and other facilities for providing computer labs in the Schools are not completed within the time as stipulated in our order.
We appreciate the efforts made by learned counsel for the parties.
This PIL petition is disposed off accordingly. In view of the directions and observations, which have been made by us in the PIL petition, we are not inclined to proceed further in the contempt petition. The same is closed. (FARJAND ALI),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),J Mohita/41-42 (Downloaded on 23/10/2021 at 10:15:47 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)