Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jodhpur Municipal Corporation, ... vs Madan Lal on 7 September, 2022
Bench: Sandeep Mehta, Kuldeep Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
JODHPUR
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 428/2020
Jodhpur Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur
----Appellant
Versus
Tulchhi Ram
----Respondent
Connected With
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 371/2020
Jodhpur Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur
----Appellant
Versus
Madan Lal
----Respondent
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 407/2020
Jodhpur Municipal Corporation,
----Appellant
Versus
Sunil
----Respondent
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 408/2020
Jodhpur Municipal Corporation,
----Appellant
Versus
Sanjay
----Respondent
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 416/2020
Jodhpur Municipal Corporation,
----Appellant
Versus
Nirmala
----Respondent
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 424/2020
Jodhpur Municipal Corporation,
----Appellant
Versus
Ashok
----Respondent
(Downloaded on 09/09/2022 at 08:59:25 PM)
(2 of 5) [SAW-428/2020]
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 438/2020
Jodhpur Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur
----Appellant
Versus
Smt. Neeta
----Respondent
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 442/2020
Jodhpur Municipal Corporation,
----Appellant
Versus
Kalawati Kanojiya
----Respondent
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 443/2020
Jodhpur Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur
----Appellant
Versus
Smt. Ghevanri
----Respondent
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 445/2020
Jodhpur Municipal Corporation
----Appellant
Versus
Meenakshi Kanwar
----Respondent
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 467/2020
Jodhpur Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur
----Appellant
Versus
Smt. Rekha Devi
----Respondent
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 469/2020
Jodhpur Municipal Corp.
----Appellant
Versus
Smt. Manjusha
----Respondent
(Downloaded on 09/09/2022 at 08:59:25 PM)
(3 of 5) [SAW-428/2020]
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 490/2020
Jodhpur Municipal Corporation
----Appellant
Versus
Sharda
----Respondent
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 42/2021
Jodhpur Municipal Corp. Jodhpur
----Appellant
Versus
Leela Devi
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Suniel Purohit
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Lokesh Mathur, Mr. S.S. Nirban,
Mr. Rishabh Tayal, Mr. S.R. Pandit,
Ms. Preet Kamal Sidhu
Mr. Akshay Nagori
Mr. Sudhir Saruparia
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR Order 07/09/2022 The present special appeal has been filed assailing the order of the learned Single Judge, whereby a direction has been issued to reinstate the respondents on the post of Safai Karamchari with all consequential benefits.
Learned counsel for the appellant pleaded that the respondents, while seeking appointment on the post of Safai Karamchari, submitted false affidavit indicating inter-alia that he/she had less than two children after the cut-off date i.e. 01.06.2002. However, upon scrutiny of record, it was found that (Downloaded on 09/09/2022 at 08:59:25 PM) (4 of 5) [SAW-428/2020] each of respondents was having more than two children after the cut-off date. He submitted that the appointments of the respondents were rightly cancelled and, therefore, the same should not have been interfered with by the learned Single Judge.
Per contra, it was submitted on behalf of the respondents that Rule 9A of the Rajasthan Municipalities (Safai Employees Service) Rules, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 2012'), which provides that any person, who has more than two children on or after 01.06.2022, shall not be eligible for appointment on the post of Safai Karamchari, has been declared to be ultra-vires by a Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 02.04.2019 rendered in a batch of writ petitions led by D.B. Civil Writ Petition NO.16572/2018 [Anita & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.]. It was, thus, submitted that the condition of having two or less than two children for appointment on the post of Safai Karamchari cannot be imposed upon the respondents and thus, even if the declaration was erroneous, it could not be treated as an impediment against their selection against the post.
The matter requires consideration.
Admit.
Since the respondents are represented through their respective counsel, notices need not be issued.
In view of the fact that a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Anita (supra), has struck down the Rule 9A of the Rules of 2012, we find no reason to continue the interim order passed by this Court in these appeals.
Accordingly, the interim order, passed in these Special Appeals stand vacated.
(Downloaded on 09/09/2022 at 08:59:25 PM)
(5 of 5) [SAW-428/2020] The stay applications stand dismissed.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J
79-92-skm/-
(Downloaded on 09/09/2022 at 08:59:25 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)