Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
The State Of Rajasthan vs Rajaram S/O Amraram on 23 May, 2019
Bench: Mohammad Rafiq, Narendra Singh Dhaddha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D. B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 123/2019
In
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9851/2018
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary To The Govt.
Education Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
Jaipur.
2. Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner (Raj.)
3. District Education Officer (Elementary Education),
Shriganganagar (Raj.)
4. District Education Officer (Elementary Education),
Hanumangarh (Raj.)
----Appellants
Versus
1. Rajaram S/o Amraram, Aged About 40 Years, R/o 3Dkd,
Dandi,tehsil Pugal, District Bikaner At Present Working As
Para-Teacher/ Shiksha Sahyogi
2. Balrj Singh S/o Barbans Singh, R/o Vpo Malarampura,
Tehsil Sangaria, Disrict Hanumangarh, At Present Working
As Para- Teacher/ Shiksha Sahyogi
3. Nirmala Bai D/o Lalu Ram W/o Lal Chand, R/o Ward No.
02, 17Stg, P.o. Kaman, Disrict Hanumangarh, At Present
Working As Para- Teacher/ Shiksha Sahyogi
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. C.L. Saini, AAG.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Judgment 23/05/2019 Defect No. 5 is overruled.
(Downloaded on 29/06/2019 at 03:37:03 AM)
(2 of 3) [SAW-123/2019] There is delay in filing of this appeal. The appellants have filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay.
For stated reasons, the applications filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is allowed. The delay in filing appeal is condoned.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants. Mr. C.L. Saini, learned Additional Advocate General who appears on behalf of the appellants-State, submits that this matter is squarely covered by order dated 20.09.2018 of a Coordinate Bench of this court in D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.970/2018 - The State of Rajasthan and Others Vs. Smt. Itee Shri Maheshwari.
It is submitted that the respondents, who were the writ-petitioners, stated before the Court in the writ petition that they were para teachers. They claimed parity with Teacher Gr.III and Prabodhaks. The learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition on the very first date of listing without notice to the appellants herein. The principle of law culled out by the learned Single Judge is 'equal pay for equal work'. There are two infirmities in the impugned order. The first is violation of principles of natural justice. The respondents were not issued a notice before the direction was issued. Secondly, para teachers were claiming equivalence with 'Prabodhaks' and Teacher Gr.III. and without deciding equivalence, impugned order has been passed.
Learned Additional Advocate General submitted that judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Punjab & Others Vs. Jagjit Singh & Others, (2017) 1 SCC 148, relying upon which the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition filed by the (Downloaded on 29/06/2019 at 03:37:03 AM) (3 of 3) [SAW-123/2019] respondents without notice to the appellants, has itself been distinguished by the Supreme Court in State Bihar & Others Vs. The Bihar Secondary Teachers Struggle Committee, Munger & Others (Civil Appeal No. 4862/2019 and other connected matters decided on 10.05.2019).
The appeal is disposed of setting aside the impugned order. The writ petition is restored to its original number for adjudication before the learned Single Judge with a request that after granting the appellants, who are the respondents in the writ petition, opportunity of filing a reply to the writ petition, the same be decided in accordance with the law.
This also disposes of the stay application. Application No. 97085/2018 also stands disposed of. (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J Manoj/8 (Downloaded on 29/06/2019 at 03:37:03 AM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)