Kamal Singh vs The State Of Rajasthan ...

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Kamal Singh vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 27 May, 2024

Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati, Yogendra Kumar Purohit

[2024:RJ-JD:23929-DB]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                   D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 550/2024

Kamal Singh S/o Late Shri Chand Singh, Aged About 33 Years,
Resident Of- Ward No.-20, Near Shanni Temple, Pilibanga,
District- Hanumangarh.
                                                                       ----Appellant
                                       Versus
1.       The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary
         To Government Energy Department, Government Of
         Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur
2.       The Jodhpur Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Limited, Through The
         Managing Director, New Power House, Industrial Area,
         Jodhpur - 342003.
3.       The Superintendent Of Engineer (O And M), Jodhpur
         Vidyut   Vitaran        Nigam       Limited,       Hanumangarh      Circle,
         District Hanumangarh.
4.       The Assistant Engineer (O And M), Jodhpur Vidyut Vitaran
         Nigam Limited, Hanumangarh Circle, Pilibanga, District
         Hanumangarh.
                                                                    ----Respondents


For Appellant(s)             :     Dr. Kshamendra Mathur
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr. Rajesh Panwar, Sr. Adv. & AAG
                                   assisted by Mr. Ayush Gehlot
                                   Mr. D.S. Sodha



     HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT Order 27/05/2024

1. The appellant has preferred the present special appeal claiming the following reliefs:-

a) The Special Appeal Writ Petition may kindly be allowed;

b) That the impugned judgment dated 22.04.2024, and the impugned order dated 04.04.2024 (Annexure 7 to the Writ Petition) may be quashed and set aside.

[2024:RJ-JD:23929-DB] (2 of 3) [SAW-550/2024]

c) That the Respondent may be directed to comply with and adhere to the mandatory requirement of Rule 3 of Regulation 2023 and other provisions of the same Regulation 2023 to achieve its aim and object related to safety and the lives of the incumbents.

d) That the cost of the Petition may be ordered to be awarded.

e) Any other order which this Honorable Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case may kindly be issued in favors of the Appellant-Petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant has tried to persuade this Court on sympathetic grounds that due to lack of qualified and trained personnel working on high tension/electricity junctions has led to an increase in casualty and accident rates. He submits that during the tenure of employment of the appellant, he has been discharging his duties as a desk job, and thus, is not trained to discharge field duties.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant has also vehemently tried to persuade this Court that the respondents will be jeopardizing the safety and security of the present appellant by deputing him to discharge field duties, and thus, this Court needs to intervene immediately. Learned counsel also submits that policy of the respondents and the office circular also support the case of the present appellant, as the duties assigned to him are not in conformity with the circulars and the officer order of the respondent department.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is no illegality in the order passed by the respondents. He further submits that each and every submission of the appellant was considered by the learned Single Judge of this Hon'ble Court and it was held that the appellant has been appointed on the post of (Downloaded on 28/05/2024 at 08:54:52 PM) [2024:RJ-JD:23929-DB] (3 of 3) [SAW-550/2024] Helper Grade-1 and thus, he has to do the field job to discharge the full duties, as it would be required in the period of crises when the heatwave is going on and the electricity department is currently facing challenges in maintaining essential services for a common man, and it is crucial that the appellant fulfills his responsibilities effectively.

5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record of the case, this Court finds that there may be sympathetic reasons or certain risks, which are involved in the job, but at the same time, these are essential services and do not warrant any intervention by this Court, particularly when the appellant was appointed on Helper Grade-1 way back in year 2009 and then such appointee requires to go for field duties, as and when required. The sympathy be invoked by the appellant on the ground of the risks of accident may be genuine, but at the same time, such risks are part of the jobs particularly that of the electricity department and this Court acknowledges that the respondents should make every possible effort to ensure the safety of all individuals and take all necessary precautions to maintain the safety standards.

6. With the aforesaid observation, no interference in the impugned order is called for, and thus, the present appeal is dismissed.

(YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT),J (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J 14-sudheer/-

(Downloaded on 28/05/2024 at 08:54:52 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)