Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sangita vs State Of Rajasthan on 23 October, 2018
Author: Arun Bhansali
Bench: Arun Bhansali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ No. 16200/2018
1. Sangita W/o Dinesh, Aged About 40 Years, By Caste
Valmiki, 2620, Lal Sagar, Jodhpur
2. Sarita W/o Rajesh, Aged About 39 Years, By Caste
Valmiki, Harijan Basti, Udaimandir, Jodhpur
3. Rajesh S/o Sohanlal, Aged About 41 Years, By Caste
Valmiki, 1491, Udaimandir, Harijan Basti, Ward No. 36,
Jodhpur
4. Prakash S/o Kaluram, Aged About 24 Years, By Caste
Valmiki, Juni Bagar, Harijan Basti, Jodhpur
5. Bebi W/o Kalu Ram, Aged About 43 Years, By Caste
Valmiki, Harijan Basti, Bagar Chowck, Kila Road, Jodhpur
6. Pinki W/o Ashok, Aged About 30 Years, By Caste Valmiki,
Harijan Basti, Kila Road, Jodhpur
7. Ashok S/o Tulsi Ram, Aged About 38 Years, By Caste
Valmiki, Harijan Basti, Juni Bagar, Jodhpur
8. Chagan Lal S/o Shiv Ram, Aged About 40 Years, By Caste
Valmiki, Nehru Colony, Ratanada, Jodhpur
9. Ratan Lal S/o Jawri Lal, Aged About 44 Years, By Caste
Valmiki, Bagar Chowck, Harijan Basti, Kila Road, Jodhpur
10. Virendra S/o Mohan Lal, Aged About 44 Years, By Caste
Valmiki, Bagar Beri, Kila Road, Jodhpur
11. Guddi W/o Mukesh, Aged About 38 Years, By Caste
Valmiki, Near Pratap Nagar, Bus Stand, Jodhpur
12. Meera W/o Vinod, Aged About 36 Years, By Caste Valmiki,
Nawal Basti, Sardarpura, Jodhpur
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Local
Self Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. Municipal Council, Jodhpur, Through Executive Officer,
Jodhpur
3. Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kaushal Gautam
(2 of 3) [CW-16200/2018]
For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Champawat for
Mr. Rajesh Panwar, AAG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI
Order 23/10/2018 Learned counsel for the parties submit that the issues raised in the present writ petition are squarely covered by judgment of this Court in Ravi Jajot v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10496/2018, decided on 30.8.2018 and, therefore, the present writ petition may also be decided in terms of the said judgment.
In the case of Ravi Jajot (supra), a Coordinate Bench of this Court after dealing with the issues, raised therein, inter alia, directed as under:-
"57. Learned counsel for the respondents further states that as far as the discrepancies of underage, overage, third child, false affidavits, false experience and all other ineligibilities are concerned, the respondents are prepared to consider the respective representation of the parties concerned, which shall be decided by passing a speaking order, strictly in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the respondents also states that the multiple applicants shall also be disqualified, even if they got selected in one of the applications.
58. Learned counsel for the respondents further stated that the due reservation of Ex- servicemen, handicapped and women categories alongwith the horizontal reservation have been strictly adopted, in accordance with law. However, any representation, if given regarding non-applicability of the reservation of handicapped persons or ex- servicemen, the same shall also be considered and decided by passing a speaking order strictly in accordance with law.
59. Learned counsel for the respondents also stated that the redressal mechanism provided in Section 53 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act would not apply in this case, because the recruitments are being conducted by the respondents strictly in (3 of 3) [CW-16200/2018] accordance with law, while adopting a uniform procedure. However, all the grievances, except for, which are raised here in these cases, the same shall be considered, if raised before the respondents, by passing a speaking order strictly in accordance with law.
60. Learned counsel for the respondents further submitted that as far as the preferential appointment is concerned, the same cannot be accepted in this case, as the lottery was opened by standard computer software, and thus, no manual role was there in opening of the lottery, as per the uniform criteria adopted all over the Rajasthan, and hence, any person being relative of any other person would not make any impact, as there was no discretion available on the part of the selectors, as the appointments were made strictly on the basis of computerized lottery system."
In view of the submissions made, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed in terms of judgment in the case of Ravi Jajot (supra) with similar directions as noticed hereinbefore.
(ARUN BHANSALI),J A.K. Chouhan/-97 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)