Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 1]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Budha Ram Choudhary vs State (Education) & Ors on 16 April, 2012

Author: Dinesh Maheshwari

Bench: Dinesh Maheshwari

                                                  SBCWP No. 3473/2012.
                          Budha Ram Choudhary Vs. State (Education) & Ors.
                                  [ 1 ]
6
              S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3473/2012.
                       Budha Ram Choudhary
                                Vs.
                       State (Education) & Ors.
                                  ..

    Date of Order :: 16th April 2012.

          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI

    Mr. Rameshwar Dave, for the petitioner.
    Mr. Prithvi Raj Singh, for the respondent No.1.
                                  <<>>

    BY THE COURT:

In view of the short submissions made in this matter, the learned counsel Mr. Prithvi Raj Singh, who has been appearing for the Rajasthan Council of Elementary Education in this Court has been requested to and has put in appearance for the respondent No.1. Service on the other respondents is dispensed with.

The petitioner herein, who is said to have been sent on deputation for rendering the services in Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, has made a representation for being repatriated to his parent Department. The essential grievance of the petitioner is that the representation has not been considered so far.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the orders passed by this Court in similar nature petitions, including that in CWP No. 6928/2010 : Rajesh Vyas Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. wherein this Court has issued directions SBCWP No. 3473/2012.

Budha Ram Choudhary Vs. State (Education) & Ors.

[ 2 ] for consideration of the similar nature representation expeditiously. It is submitted that the present petitioner also deserves the same treatment and his representation deserves to be considered expeditiously.

The prayer appears reasonable. Therefore, the respondents are directed to decide the representation already made by the petitioner by a speaking order, while dealing with all the relevant aspects and as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 30 days from today.

It is made clear that if any order is passed on the representation adverse to the petitioner, he would be free to take recourse to the appropriate remedies in accordance with law.

The petition is partly allowed to the extent and in the manner indicated above.

(DINESH MAHESHWARI), J.

/Mohan/