Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Balu Ram And Ors vs State Of Raj. And Ors on 17 December, 2018
Author: Arun Bhansali
Bench: Arun Bhansali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ No. 2661/2011
1. Balu Ram S/o Sh. Mahaveer Prasad aged about 26 years by
caste Meghwal R/o VPO Alsisar, Th. & Disst. Jhunjhunu. Present
posted at Govt. Upper Primary Sanskrit School, Sehwaj, Teh.
Marwar Jn. Disst. Pali.
2. Mukesh Kumar Saini S/o Mahaveer Prasad Saini, aged about
25 years, B/c Mali, VPO Alsisar, Teh. & Disst. Jhunjhunu, present
posted at Govt. Upper Primary Sanskrit School, Jhadoli.
3. Smt. Sunita Moond D/o Sh. Bajran Lal aged about 26 years
B/c Jat, R/o Village Manaka Wali Kothi (Kirpura) post Khatkar,
Vaya Titanwar, Teh. Udaipurwati, Disst. Jhunjhunu. Present
posted at Govt. Upper Primary Sanskrit School, Khatkar Meena
Ki Dhani, Udaipurwati, Disst. Jhunjhunu.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan through the Secretary, Department of
Education (Primary), Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
2. The Director, Primary Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. RPSC, Ajmer through its Secretary.
4. The Director, Sanskrit Education, Rajasthan, Jaipur 2 nd Floor,
Block 6, Shiksha Sankul, JLN Marg, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Inderjeet Yadav.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Khet Singh.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI
Order 17/12/2018 It is submitted by learned counsel for the parties that the issue raised in the present writ petition is covered by judgment in the case of Smt. Raju Devi v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2685/2011, decided on 7.3.2018, which in turn has relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Munna Ram & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: Civil Appeal (2 of 3) [CW-2661/2011] No.7169/2014, decided on 8.2.2018 and, therefore, the present writ petition may be decided in terms of the said judgments.
In the case of Munna Ram (supra), it was directed by Hon'ble Supreme Court as under:-
"3. Accordingly, these appeals are disposed of with a direction to the State to continue the service of the appellants as Teachers Grade III (General), treating them to have been validly selected and appointed with effect from 13.08.2013, the date on which this appeal (by special leave) was filed, for all purposes. 4. We make it clear that this Judgment is passed only in the peculiar facts of this case and the benefit is confined only to the appellants before this Court, since they are the only people who have been continuing litigation before this Court. We also make it clear that in case any such teachers have been pursuing their litigation in the High Court and in case such teachers are continuing on duty, it will be open to the High Court to give a quietus to the litigation by following this Judgment, limiting the benefit only to the appellants before the High Court. No costs."
Whereafter in the case of Smt. Raju Devi (supra), it was directed as under:-
"3. In light of the aforesaid submission and looking into the fact that the petitioner is pursuing her case before this Court since 28.3.2011 and has been given protection vide order dated 28.3.2011, this Court deems it just and proper to direct the respondents to continue the petitioner on duty as her cause of action stands settled in view of the aforementioned judgment."
In light of the above two judgments and the fact that by order dated 28.3.2011, interim order was granted in favour of the (3 of 3) [CW-2661/2011] petitioner, it is deemed appropriate to direct the respondents to continue the petitioner on duty as his cause of action stands settled in view of judgments in the case of Munna Ram (supra) & Smt. Raju Devi (supra).
The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.
(ARUN BHANSALI),J 91-Sumit/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)