Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Banwari Lal Kumawat Son Of Shri Mangal ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 22 August, 2019
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14248/2019
Banwari Lal Kumawat Son Of Shri Mangal Chand Kumawat, Aged
About 31 Years, Resident Of 80, Rampura Bariya, Post Gudha
Bairsal, Via Phulera, Distt. Jaipur, Raj. (Worked As Vocational
Trainer Of It And Ites At Govt. Sen. Sec. School, Harmara, Jaipur
Through Aisect)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of
School Education, Secretariat, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur
Raj.
2. Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. State Project Director, Rajasthan Council Of School
Education, Jhawarlal Nehru Marg, Jaipur.
4. Chief District Education Officer And Ex-Officio, District
Project Coordinator, Samagra Siksha Abhiyaan, District
Jaipur, Raj.
5. Aisect, Sd 199, Shanti Nagar, Opp. Sbi Bank, Hatwara
Road, Near Dispensary No.4, Sodala, Jaipur-302006
Through Its Director.
6. Quess Corp Ltd., 3/3/2, Bellandur Gate, Sarjapur Road,
Bangalaluru, Karnataka Through Its Director
7. Bhagini Nivedita Shiksha Samiti, 40, Shiv Shakti Nagar,
Ahamadpur, Hoshangabad Road, Bhopal, M.p. Through Its
Director.
8. Itrc Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Itrc House, 306-Eb, Sector B
Scheme 94, Opposite Bombay Hospita, Indore, M.p.
Through Its Director.
9. Amass Skill Ventures Private Ltd., 2Nd Floor, Shri Krishna
Dharam Kanta Complex, Fake Rolex More, Opp. Anaj
Mandi, N.h.8, Gurgaon, Haryana Through Its Director.
10. Basix Academy For Building Lifelong Employability,
315/274, 2Nd Floor, Garden Of Five Senses Road, Behind
Saket Metro Station, Saidulajaib, New Delhi-110030
Through Its Director.
----Respondents
(Downloaded on 06/06/2021 at 06:14:18 PM)
(2 of 3) [CW-14248/2019] For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shrey Gaharana For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI Judgment / Order 22/08/2019 The petitioner preferred this writ petition claiming following prayers:-
i) quash and set aside the letter/ order dt.
17.5.2019 (Annexure. 5) passed by the respondents.
ii) quash and set aside the letter/ order dt. 20.5.2019 (Annexure. 6) passed by the respondents.
iii) the advertisement dt. 29.5.2019 (online BID) (Annexure. 7) may kindly be declared as illegal and further may kindly be set aside as it is against the principles of Law and natural Justice.
iv) the respondents may be directed to reinstate the services of the services of the present petitioner on the post of Vocational Trainer at Govt. Sen Sec. School; Harmara, Jaipur after declaring his services as continue, take his attendance and gave him all the previous due payments immediately and to give future payments also uninterruptedly.
v) the respondents may be directed to give the due payments (Salary) and the future payments (salary) to the present petitioner directly by the State Government as the contract with the placement agency of the petitioner was expired on dt. 30.6.2019 and the petitioner gave his services to the Government after that expiry period to till and June 2019.
vi) that the Respondents No. 6 to 10 may kindly be directed to absorb the present petitioner in their companies for the purpose of the employment for the post of Vocational Trainer as per their qualifications in the relevant trade of IT & Ites in Jaipur.
Vii) Any other appropriate writ, order or directions to which the petitioner may be entitled to in the circumstances of the case may be issued in his favour.
viii) Cost of the writ petition may be awarded in favour of the petitioner.
At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petition is covered by the judgment rendered by this court in (Downloaded on 06/06/2021 at 06:14:18 PM) (3 of 3) [CW-14248/2019] the case of Seema Gupta Vs. State of Rajasthan, decided on 06.08.2019.
On perusal, this court finds that the facts of the case are same as decided by this court in the matter of Seema Gupta (supra).
In the light of the aforesaid observation, present writ petition is allowed in the same terms. Operative portion of the judgment Seema Gupta (supra) is quoted hereunder:-
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and looking to the factual matrix of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of these writ petitions while intervening on a limited count, which is that if the petitioners are having proper qualification and are eligible to be appointed as Vocational Trainers and were duly selected by the respondents strictly in accordance with law on contractual basis, then their services shall not be replaced by another set of contractual Vocational Trainers to be appointed in pursuance of the order dated 20th May, 2019. While observing as above, this Court makes it clear that this Court is not inclined to go into the legality of the order dated 20th May, 2019 at this stage as the same is not prejudicial to the interest of the present petitioners. The protection to the petitioners shall be strictly as per their qualification and eligibility and appointment based on legal selection process for the contractual post of Vocational Trainers. The substitution shall not be made by another set of Vocational Trainers being appointed in pursuance of the order dated 20th May, 2019. The respondents shall, however, be free to conduct the services of the petitioners as per the existing project and scheme. Lastly, while addressing the apprehension raised by counsel for the petitioners that their salaries are not being paid in time since long, we direct the respondents to pay the salary to the petitioners as expeditiously as possible."
(PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J Sunita Kanwar /113 (Downloaded on 06/06/2021 at 06:14:18 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)