Chena Ram Choudhary vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 97 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10192/2020

Chena Ram Choudhary S/o Jala Ram, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Siyagon Ki Dhani, Village Dabali, Panchayat Samiti Sayala, Jalore, District Jalore (Raj.)

----Petitioner Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The Additional Commissioner-Cum-Joint Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

3. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Jalore.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jitender Singh Bhaleria through VC.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manish Tak through VC.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

Order

05/01/2021

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that

issue raised in the present petition is squarely covered by

judgment of this Court in Mamta Meena v. State of Rajasthan &

Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13305/2019, decided on

24.10.2019 (Annexure-11).

In the case of Mamta Meena (supra), this Court after

considering the submissions made inter alia observed and directed

as under:

(2 of 2) [CW-10192/2020]

"Admittedly, the petitioners did not appear at the time of initial counseling in the year 2013, however, the respondents, at the relevant time, were not treating the candidates like petitioners as eligible and subsequently, the order dated 11.07.2018 has issued clarifying the situation.

In view thereof, merely because the petitioners had not appeared during the initial counseling cannot be a reason to deprive the petitioners of for consideration.

Consequently, the writ petitions filed by the petitioners are allowed. The respondents are directed to consider the candidature of the petitioners for appointment on the post of LDC pursuant to the advertisement of the year 2013, based on their computer qualification, in terms of the order dated 11.07.2018, if candidates in petitioners' category having lower marks, have been accorded appointment by the respondents and vacancies are still available with the respondents."

Learned counsel for the respondents is not in a position to

dispute the fact that the issue raised in the present writ petition is

covered by judgment in the case of Mamta Meena (supra).

In view of the above fact situation, the writ petition filed by

the petitioner is allowed in light of and with similar directions as

given in the case of Mamta Meena (supra).

(ARUN BHANSALI),J 31-Sachin/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)