Suman W/O Shri Deepak Kumar vs Deputy Director, Women And Child ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 7308 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

               D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 676/2021

Suman W/o Shri Deepak Kumar, Aged About 22 Years, R/o
Naiwari, Tehsil Bhusawar, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan).
                                                                      ----Appellant
                                      Versus
1.     Deputy      Director,        Women          And       Child    Development
       Department, Bharatpur (Rajasthan).
2.     Child    Development            And      Programming          Officer,   Weir,
       District Bharatpur (Rajasthan).
3.     Manju Kumari W/o Vikram Singh, R/o Bijwari Tehsil Weir,
       District Bharatpur.
                                                                   ----Respondents

For Appellant(s)            :     Mr. T.C. Vyas
For Respondent(s)           :

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA SHANKER VYAS

Judgment

07/12/2021

This appeal arises out of the judgment of the learned Single

Judge dated 08/04/2021. The authorities required to make

appointment to the post of Aganbari Sahayika in Gram Panchayat

Naiwara, District Bharatpur. One of the requirement for

appointment of the candidate was that he/she must be local

resident of a village. The petitioner was appointed in preference to

respondent No.3 which the respondent No.3 challenged before the

appellate authority which reversed the decision on the ground that

she had been able to produce the necessary documents in support

of her case that she is a local resident of village Naiwara. The

petitioner then approached the High Court. The learned Single

(2 of 2) [SAW-676/2021]

Judge dismissed the petition observing that respondent No.3 had

produced the ration card, domicile certificate issued by the sub

divisional officer, marriage certificate and electoral roll of the local

area.

Being a pure question of fact when the first appellate court

and the learned Single Judge have on the basis of voluminous

documents on record held that respondent No.3 is a local resident

of the village, in this appeal, we do not see any ground for taking

a different view.

The appeal is dismissed.

(UMA SHANKER VYAS),J (AKIL KURESHI),CJ

ANIL KUMAR GOYAL /BM GANDHI-13

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)