Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Dinesh Charan vs State Of Rajasthan on 28 August, 2019
Author: Arun Bhansali
Bench: Arun Bhansali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15380/2018
Sushma Chobisa D/o Chandra Shekhar Sharma, Aged About 54
Years, J-27, Sector-14, Behind Udaipur Dairy Plant, Goverdhan
Villas, Udaipur (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
Higher Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan,
Jaipur
2. The Commissioner, College Education Department,
Shiksha Sankul, Jln Marg, Government Of Rajasthan,
Jaipur
3. The Joint Director (Hrd), College Education, Government
Of Rajasthan, Jaipur
4. The Principal, V.k.b Government Kanya Mahavidhyala,
Dungerpur
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14267/2018
1. Dinesh Charan S/o Shri Karni Dan, Aged About 37 Years,
Jailwala Khurd, Post-Nanan Via Pipad City, Jodhpur
2. Dr. Santosh Gomtiwal D/o Shri Magan Lal Ji, Aged About
41 Years, 7/4 P And T Colony, Shastri Nagar, Jodhpur
3. Dr. Alpana Vyas D/o B.d. Purohit, Aged About 46 Years, 6-
C-19, Pawan Puri, South Extension, Bikaner
4. Dr. Chandraprkash S/o Kirata Ram, Aged About 45 Years,
V/p Rawar Tehsil Bilara District Jodhpur
5. Veena Purohit W/o Shreedhar Narayan Purohit, Aged
About 41 Years, Naya Shahar, Inside Dharm Nagar Dwar
Bikaner
6. Dr. Alok Jain S/o Ramesh Chandra Jain, Aged About 43
Years, Pragati Nagar, Street No. 4 College Road Banswara
7. Bhanwar Lal Solanki S/o Luna Ram Solanki, Aged About
34 Years, Vpo Bajju Tejpura Tehsil Kolayat District Bikaner
8. Jyoti Saxena, Aged About 41 Years, In Front Of Sardul
Sport School Behind Bidasar House New Gajnar Road
(Downloaded on 30/08/2019 at 08:43:49 PM)
(2 of 10)
Bikaner
9. Dr. Ompuri Swami S/o Basantpuri Swami, Aged About 42
Years, Vpo Narta Tehsil Bhinmal District Jalore
10. Atul Kumar Joshi S/o Ashok Kumar Joshi, Aged About 33
Years, Surya Villa Infront Of Rseb Shastri Nagar,
Mandalgarh Bhilwara
11. Dr. Arjunlal Yadav S/o Foosa Ram Yadav, Aged About 43
Years, Baba Ki Nimbari V/p Dheerapura Tehsil Balesar
Jodhpur
12. Yogendra Singh Sankhala S/o Inder Singh Sankhla, Aged
About 39 Years, 239 Bapu Nagar Vistar Pali Raj.
13. Marium Bano Chungar D/o Maludeen Chungar, Aged
About 35 Years, Saroj General Store High School Road Sri
Dungargarh District Bikaner Yogesh Sharma S/o
Premchand Sharma R/o V/p Tharlarka Teh Nohar
Hanumangarh
14. Farsa Ram S/o Gulla Ram, Aged About 43 Years, Village
Post Sarana, Via Balotara, District Barmer
15. Dr. Rajeev Chouhan S/o Sangat Singh, Aged About 41
Years, Kalyanpur Marg No. 4 Barmer
16. Dr. Nitin Gupta S/o Murli Manohar Gupta, Aged About 41
Years, 110, Ambedkar Nagar, Uit Colony Kunahari Kota
17. Amita Saraswat W/o Ritesh Saraswat, Aged About 34
Years, C-3 Alv Textile Engineering College Staff Colony
Bhilwara
18. Dr. Mamta Choudhary W/o Anurag Choudhary, Aged
About 43 Years, 102, Nanak Apartment Arya Samaj Road,
Kota
19. Dr. Leenta Arora W/o Dr. Arun Sharma, Aged About 48
Years, H.no. 2-A Durga Nagar, Poonam Colony, Kota
20. Amita Mali D/o Nathu Ram Mali, Aged About 27 Years, 44
Saral Vihar Near Ccl Coaching Akashvani Colony Kota
21. Ravindra Kumar Badal S/o Mohan Lal, Aged About 42
Years, Chh 13, Ambedkar Nagar, Kunhadi Kota
22. Talvinder Kaur D/o Baljindra Singh, Aged About 36 Years,
236, Shastri Nagar, Dadabadi Kota
23. Radha Krishan Meena S/o Ramswaroop Meena, Aged
About 43 Years, Village Many Ka Bas Tehsil Kathumar
District Alwar
(Downloaded on 30/08/2019 at 08:43:49 PM)
(3 of 10)
24. Dr. Rekha Kumari Vishwakarma D/o Ghanshyam
Vishwakarma, Aged About 33 Years, Vishwakarma Sadan
Bazar No. 3 Ramganj Mandi Kota
25. Mahendra Singh Meena S/o Ramhansh Meena, Aged
About 37 Years, Village-Divli Tehsil- Bhusawar, District
Bharatpur
26. Neha Jain D/o Padam Chand Godha, Aged About 34
Years, H.no. 48 Van Vihar Colony Vaishally Nagar Ajmer
27. Sitaram Berwa S/o Dayachand Bairwa, Aged About 42
Years, Rajputana Kirana Store, Balita Road Kunhari Kota
28. Himani Bhatia D/o Sh. Laxminarayan Bhatia, Aged About
38 Years, 1U29 Talwandi Kota
29. Dr. Vandana Sharma, Aged About 30 Years, B-17 Pragati
Nagar Devli Arab Road, Borkhera Kota
30. Bhavana Sharma D/o B.k. Sharma, Aged About 42 Years,
828 Shastri Ngar Dadabari Kota
31. Rakesh Verma S/o Lalluram Verma, Aged About 33 Years,
1/102, Housing Board Dausa
32. Aparna Sharma D/o Hariom Sharma, Aged About 35
Years, H.no. 21 Near Ramdhan Ashram Godavri Dham
Dadabari Kota
33. Ashok Kumar Meena S/o Ramswaroop Meena, Aged About
39 Years, V/p Hurla Teh. Mahuwa District Dausa
34. Vinod Kumar Garg, Aged About 43 Years, Agroha Point In
Front Of Krishan Nagar Near Of Welfcome Bakery College
Road Gangapur City District Sawai Madhopur
35. Dr. Sunita Rathore D/o Girdhari Singh, Aged About 27
Years, P.s. Rajawat Dcm Lg Nagar Kota
36. Yogesh Sharma S/o Sh. Prem Chand Sharma, Aged About
38 Years, Mukam Post Thaladka, Tehsil Nohar, Hanuman
Garh
37. Vishal Tiwari S/o Satyendra Kumar Tiwari, Aged About 34
Years, 279/39 Tiwari Bhawan, Near Mount, Marry School,
Ashok Nagar, Subhash Nagar Ajmer
38. Dr. Monika Garg D/o Chhail Bihara Garg, Aged About 30
Years, C/o Suresh K Manglam And Co. 186 Shopping
Center Kota
39. Dharamveer Meena S/o Babulal Meena, Aged About 34
Years, V/p Teerath District Bundi
(Downloaded on 30/08/2019 at 08:43:49 PM)
(4 of 10)
40. Ramprasad S/o Hariram, Aged About 43 Years, Vp
Mahawa, Tehsil Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar
41. Rahul Meena S/o Shri Moolchand Meena, Aged About 35
Years, V/p Sewa Tehsil Gangapur City District Sawai
Madhopur
42. Asha Pandey D/o Mahesh Chandra, Aged About 37 Years,
Plot No. 103-104, Lakhan Kokhri Suraj Ram Ka Chowk,
Ajmer
43. Manjul Mayank Dixit S/o Gopinath Sharma, Aged About
38 Years, Dhanwantri Nagar, Nahar Road, Gangapur City,
Sawai Madhopur
44. Ram Raj Meena S/o Shri Lal Meena, Aged About 38 Years,
Sujanpura, Post- Sharakar, Tehsil Todabhim, Karauli
45. Chhote Lal Balai S/o Shri Nahaya Ram Balai, Aged About
37 Years, Village And Post Bijwar Naruka, Tehsil And
District Alwar
46. Reeta Rani Rameja W/o Vikash Rameja, Aged About 35
Years, House No. 88, Gali No. 10, Setia Colony, Sri Ganga
Nagar
47. Dr. Manju Sharma W/o Sh. Arvind Dixit, Aged About 48
Years, Shiv Colony, Jaipur Road, Gangupar City, Sawai
Madhopur
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
Higher Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan,
Jaipur
2. The Commissioner, Commissionerate College Education
Department, Shiksha Sankul, Jln Marg, Government Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur
3. The Joint Director (Hrd), College Education, Government
Of Rajasthan, Jaipur
4. The Principal, Government Bangaur College, Pali
5. The Principal, M.b.r. Government P.g. College, Balotra
6. The Principal, Government College, Shahpura, Bhilwara
7. The Principal, Government Meera Girls College, Udaipur
8. The Principal, Government Birla College, Bhawani Mandi
9. The Principal, Government Girls College, Baran
(Downloaded on 30/08/2019 at 08:43:49 PM)
(5 of 10)
10. The Principal, Government College, Kota
11. The Principal, Government College, Ajmer
12. The Principal, Government College, Karauli
13. The Principal, Government College, Pokhran, Jaisalmer
14. The Principal, Government College, Pokhran, Jaisalmer
15. The Principal, Government Girls College, Sardulshahar, Sri
Ganga Nagar
16. The Principal, Maharani Shri Jaya College, Bharatpur
17. The Principal, Government College, Baran
18. The Principal, Government College, Bundi
19. The Principal, Government College, Karauli
20. The Principal, Government Arts College, Kotai
21. The Principal, Government Girls College, Kota
22. The Principal, Government Girls College, Bikaner
23. The Principal, Government College, Sri Ganganagar
24. The Principal, Government College, Bhopalgarh
25. The Principal, Government College, Abu Road, District
Sirohi
26. The Principal, Government Dungar College Bikaner
27. The Principal, Government College, Jalore
28. The Principal, Government College, Barmer
29. The Principal, Government College, Bhinmal
30. The Principal, Government Girls College, Sirohi
31. The Principal, Government College, Nadoti
32. The Principal, Government College, Dholpur
33. The Principal, Government Girls College, Bayana
34. The Principal, Government Girls College, Karoli
35. The Principal, Government College, Banswara
36. The Principal, Mlv Government College, Bhilwara
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Varsha Bissa.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kailash Choudhary for Mr. Manish
Vyas, AAG
(Downloaded on 30/08/2019 at 08:43:49 PM)
(6 of 10)
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI
Order 28/08/2019 These matters come up on applications filed by the respondents on 01.07.2019 seeking vacation of the interim order dated 02.11.2018 passed by this Court.
Various submissions have been made in the application, inter-alia, seeking vacation of the interim order including the fact that in similar nature matters interim orders have been vacated at Jaipur Bench.
By order dated 02.11.2018, it was, inter-alia, directed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court as under :-
"Meanwhile, the effect and operation of the impugned orders dated 05.10.2018 (Annexure- 23), 08.10.2018 & 09.10.2018 (Annexure-24) dispensing with the services of the petitioners shall remain stayed.
The respondents shall permit the petitioners to continue in the same college and in the same subject.
Needless to observe that the respondents shall be at liberty to pray for vacation / modification of interim order, in case the interim order passed at Jaipur Bench of this Court is vacated or modified or otherwise by arguing the stay application."
Subsequent thereto, on 01.12.2018, noticing pendency of several stay applications in SBCWP No.14267/2018, it was ordered as under :-
"In view of the above fact situation, wherein all the petitioners otherwise are similarly situated and the respondents are continuing to ignore the interim orders passed in similar nature writ petitions / stay petitions by this Court, it is directed that effect and operation of the orders dated 26.9.2018 (Annex.17), 27.9.2018 (Annex.18), 1.10.2018 (Annex.20), 4.10.2018 (Annex.21), 16.11.2018 (Annex.26) and 19.11.2018 & 20.11.2018 (Annex.27), shall remain stayed and the petitioners shall be allowed to continue to perform their duties as Lecturers in their respective subjects in the same college.
Further qua all the petitioners, the respondents are directed not to relieve them under 'pay minus pension' scheme of the State / regular recruitment, if sanctioned posts in their subjects are still vacant.
It goes without saying that, in case, any of the similar writ petition is decided and/or interim orders granted are vacated, it would be open for the respondents to make (Downloaded on 30/08/2019 at 08:43:49 PM) (7 of 10) submissions and seek vacation of the interim orders in the present writ petition as well."
Whereafter, the present application has been filed seeking vacation of the interim order dated 02.11.2018 without referring to the order dated 01.12.2018. However, as the order dated 02.11.2018 is fundamental to the present writ petition, the matter is being considered.
Learned counsel for the respondents made submissions that in similar nature writ petition i.e. Dr. Hemendra Garg v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ petition No.23488/2017 (at Jaipur Bench), interim order granted earlier was vacated by learned Single Judge on 23.02.2018, which order was upheld by the Division Bench by its order dated 22.03.2018 and the Bench was requested to finally hear the matter. The writ petition was heard and dismissed by order dated 03.04.2019 by the learned Single Judge. Whereafter, in the appeal filed by the petitioner therein, the Division Bench disposed of the appeal by giving certain directions and therefore, the order passed by this Court deserves to be vacated / modified in consonance with the Division Bench order.
Learned counsel for the petitioners made submissions that as the Division Bench has also given similar directions, there is no necessity to vacate / modify the directions issued by this Court on 02.11.2018 and / or 01.12.2018.
Further submissions have been made that despite passing of these orders dated 02.11.2018 and 01.12.2018, orders have not been complied with and the contempt petitions filed by the petitioners are pending consideration before this Court and therefore, the respondents be directed to comply with the directions issued by this Court and the application be rejected. (Downloaded on 30/08/2019 at 08:43:49 PM)
(8 of 10) Learned counsel for the petitioners also relies on order in Satish Sharma & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : D.B. Civil Special Appeal (W) No.569/2011, decided on 27.05.2011 at Jaipur Bench.
I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record.
A bare look at the orders passed by this Court on 02.11.2018 and 01.12.2018 would reveal that the basis for grant of interim order on both the occasions has been the pendency of the writ petitions at Jaipur Bench and it was observed that the respondents would be at liberty to seek modification / vacation of the orders passed or any contrary orders passed at Jaipur Bench.
It is not in dispute that the petitioner Dr. Hemendra Garg raised similar issues before the Jaipur Bench and the learned Single Judge by order dated 03.04.2019, inter-alia, came to the following conclusion :-
"Heard. Considered.
Clause 13.1 of the Regulations of 2010 categorically provides that a contractual appointment should not be made initially for more than one academic session, and the performance of any such an appointee should be reviewed for academic performance before his reappointment for another session. It also states that the qualification and procedure for such appointment when necessitated by the urgency of the situation should be the same as for regular appointee. In the instant case admittedly the petitioner's initial appointment on contract basis was only till 28-2-2009 or till the availability of regularly selected candidates, whichever was earlier. But importantly it has never been as per the procedure mandated under clause 13.1 aforesaid but at the local level, the post was not advertised, applications from all qualified not invited and the petitioner's minimum qualifications at the relevant time and now as per the Regulations of 2010 were not and have not been ascertained. The tenure of the appointment was one academic year or till selection of regularly selected candidates. The petitioner cannot set up a case contrary to his letter of appointment dated 15-7-2008. Thereunder he has no right after the end of the one academic session. Further candidates for the post of Lecturer (Economics) regularly selected by RPSC inter alia for the post held by the petitioner are also available. The petitioner yet thereafter continued in service under interim order/s of the court (Downloaded on 30/08/2019 at 08:43:49 PM) (9 of 10) initially 22-5-2009 and on 1-7-2009. As such the petitioner's employment was thereafter quite clearly litigious. The petitioner was appointed on contract basis on a specific post and not in a "cadre". He has no right to be adjusted on another vacant post, even if any, such vacancy obtains on the cadre of Assistant Professor (Economics) in another state college. For the reasons aforementioned, I find no force in the petition. The same is dismissed. So are connected matters admittedly agitating an identical issue in the background of similar facts."
Feeling aggrieved, D.B. Civil Special Appeal (W) No.852/2019 was filed, wherein the Division Bench by its order dated 17.07.2019, directed as under :-
"17/07/2019
1. The appellant/petitioner is aggrieved by the dismissal of his writ petition.
2. The appellant complained that he functioned as Lecturer, although appointed on temporary basis, initially for one year. He was terminated from the service on 6.12.2017. His claim of reinstatement and regularization was rejected on the ground that a temporary/contractual employee has no right to claim continuation in employment beyond the term of engagement.
3. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and also considered the record including the proceedings in the writ petition.
4. What emerges from the record is that pursuant to previous orders and judgments of this Court including a Division Bench ruling, the State of Rajasthan undertook an exercise of seeking to fill regular vacancies.
5. The appellant/petitioner was working as Lecturer in Economics. According to the record, 41 regular posts of Lecturers were filled by selected candidates. It is, however, not clear whether further regular vacancies in category of Lecturers (Economics) exists. Therefore, in line with prevision decisions of the Division Bench of this Court in Satish Sharma & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. D.B. Civil Special Appeal (W) No.569/2011 and connected cases, decided on 27.5.2011 (affirmed in SLP), the respondents, are hereby directed to :-
i) Assess the number of vacancies in the cadre of regular Lecturers in Economics.
ii) In case, all the posts are not filled, consider and appoint the appellant/petitioner in its employment and continue him in service till replacements are found regularly on due completion of the recruitment process by Rajasthan Public Service Commission.
iii) The State shall not, under any circumstance, fill the posts by any contractual, temporary employee or by offering appointment to a retired individual on replacement basis.
6. The present appeal and pending applications are disposed of in the above terms."
In view of the fact that though the writ petition filed by Dr. Hemendra Garg was rejected by the learned Single Judge, Division (Downloaded on 30/08/2019 at 08:43:49 PM) (10 of 10) Bench while disposing of the writ petition, gave certain directions, the same directions needs to be applied in the present cases also.
So far as the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, based on the directions in the case of Satish Sharma (supra) is concerned, a perusal of the order by the Division Bench in the case of Dr. Hemendra Garg (supra) would reveal that the said order dated 17.07.2019 has been considered by the Division Bench and once the order has been passed taking into consideration the order in the case of Satish Sharma (supra), there is no reason for this Court to pass a different order from what has been passed by the Division Bench.
In view thereof, the applications filed by the respondents under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India are disposed of, various interim orders passed by this Court including orders dated 02.11.2018 and 01.12.2018 are varied and in view of the directions given by the Division Bench in the case of Dr. Hemendra Garg (supra), the respondents are directed to :-
i) Assess the number of vacancies in the cadre of regular Lecturers in the respective subjects of the petitioners.
ii) In case, all the posts are not filled, consider and appoint the petitioners in its employment and continue them in service till replacements are found regularly on due completion of the recruitment process by Rajasthan Public Service Commission.
iii) The State shall not, under any circumstance, fill the posts by any contractual, temporary employee or by offering appointment to a retired individual on replacement basis.
All the pending stay applications filed by the petitioners stand disposed of.
(ARUN BHANSALI),J 315 & 317-Rmathur/-
(Downloaded on 30/08/2019 at 08:43:49 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)