Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Vishal Verma Son Of Shri Prakash Chand ... vs Principal Secretary Department Of ... on 12 July, 2019
Bench: Mohammad Rafiq, Narendra Singh Dhaddha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D. B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 669/2019
In
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8896/2016
Vishal Verma Son Of Shri Prakash Chand Verma, Aged About
36 Years, Resident Of Jai Narayan Vyas Nagar, Bikaner
(Rajasthan)
----Appellant
Versus
1. Principal Secretary Department Of Skill
Entrepreneurship And Employment, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur
2. Rajasthan Skill And Livelihood Development
Corporation, J-8-A, Emi Campus, Jhalana Institutional
Area, Jaipur (Rajasthan) Through Its Managing Director
3. Vision India Staffing Private Limited, E-529, Sector-7,
Dwarka, New Delhi - 110075 Through Its Managing
Director.
4. Accenture Solutions Private Limited, Having Its
Registered Office At Plant 3, Godrej And Boyce
Complex, Lbs Marg, Vikholi (West), Mumbai,
Maharashtra- 400079 Through Its Managing Director.
5. M/s. Grant Thornton India Llp, 21St Floor, Dlf Square,
Jacaranda Marg, Dlf Phase Ii, Gurugram, Haryana
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Akhil Simlote.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Judgment 12/07/2019 This appeal is directed against judgment dated 28.02.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby writ (Downloaded on 30/08/2019 at 10:46:29 PM) (2 of 3) [SAW-669/2019] petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed, however, with certain directions.
The appellant approached this Court by filing writ petition raising grievance that while he was initially engaged through placement agency by Respondent No. 2 but the respondents later changed the placement agency. The appellant was allowed to continue for quite some time through new agency but eventually, the respondents decided to do away with services of the appellant and others. When the appellant approached this Court by way of filing writ petition, he was allowed to continue under the interim order. However, he was discontinued after dismissal of the writ petition vide impugned judgment. Learned counsel submitted that even though the appellant has worked with the respondents, may be through placement agency, but his salary including admissible allowances and provident fund for certain period has not been paid. The learned Single Judge in para no. 24 of the impugned judgment has required the respondents to device a method for recruitment even on contract through placement agency and in doing so, extend benefit of bonus marks to those, who had earlier worked with them for their experience. It is submitted that the respondents have not issued any such experience certificate to the appellant.
Having regard to the submissions aforesaid, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment. We, however, direct the respondents to examine the grievance of the appellant in not clearing his dues of salary including admissible (Downloaded on 30/08/2019 at 10:46:29 PM) (3 of 3) [SAW-669/2019] allowance and provident fund in accordance with law and also consider granting experience certificate to the appellant for the services rendered by him with the respondents including the period served by him under interim order till he was actually discontinued upon dismissal of the writ petition within a period of four months.
With the aforesaid direction, appeal is disposed of. (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J MANOJ NARWANI /53 (Downloaded on 30/08/2019 at 10:46:29 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)