Rajasthan High Court
Shiv Kumar Sharma S/O Shri Jagan ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 29 October, 2021
Bench: Prakash Gupta, Vinod Kumar Bharwani
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 238/2021
Shiv Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Jagan Nath Prasad Sharma, Aged
About 53 Years, R/o Village And Post Mandrail, District Karauli,
Rajasthan.
----Appellant
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary Education
Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner
3. Dy. Director, Secondary Education, Kota Zone, Kota
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Shiv Kumar, appellant is present
in person
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ganesh Meena, AAG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI
Judgment
29/10/2021
Application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is
allowed for the reasons mentioned therein and the delay of 172
days in filing the appeal is condoned.
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the
arguments have been heard and the appeal is being decided
finally at this stage.
This appeal has been filed by the appellant challenging
the order dated 9.7.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge,
whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant has been
dismissed.
(2 of 4) [SAW-238/2021]
Facts of the case are that on 9.8.1998, the respondents
issued an advertisement for recruitment to the post of PTI Grade-
II (Male). The respondents conducted the interview, but the
appellant was not allowed to participate therein. He filed S.B. Civil
Writ Petition No. 3168/2001 before the learned Single Judge,
which was disposed of vide order dated 5.10.2006 in the light of
the judgment dated 13.9.2000 passed by the Division Bench of
this Court in the case of State of Rajasthan & Ors. Versus Hari
Ram & 16 Ors. reported in 2001 (1) WLC (Raj.) 124. Thereafter
the appellant filed S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 159/2007,
which was dismissed vide order dated 11.2.2008. The appellant
filed another contempt petition no. 10/2009, which also came to
be dismissed vide order dated 12.1.2009. Thereafter in the year
2019, the appellant filed another S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.
15886/2019 before this Court, which came to be dismissed vide
order dated 9.7.2020. Hence, this appeal has been filed.
The appellant who is present in person submits that he
secured more marks than the last candidate selected by the
respondents. He further submits that he submitted his application
form, but the respondents denied to have received the same vide
order dated 21.7.2007.
On the other hand, learned AAG appearing for the State
has opposed the same and submits that the matter pertains to the
recruitment of the year 1998. Twice the appellant filed contempt
petitions, which were dismissed in the year 2008 and 2009
respectively. After about 10 years, the appellant filed the second
writ petition in the year 2019. The selection process has already
been over, hence no interference is required by this Court in the
order passed by the learned Single Judge.
(3 of 4) [SAW-238/2021]
Heard. Considered.
In the writ petition, the appellant prayed the following
relief:
"i) By an appropriate writ, order or direction,
the respondents may kindly be directed to give
appointment to the petitioner on the post of PTI
Grade-II by adding the marks of Sports
Certificate as well as experience of the petitioner
pursuant to the recruitment of year 1998-99
with all consequential benefits.
ii) Any other order which this Hon'ble Court
deemed just and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case may also be passed in
favour of the petitioner."
It is an admitted fact that vide order dated 21.7.2007
the respondents denied to have received the application form of
the appellant, but the said order was not challenged by the
appellant in the writ petition, as is evident from the prayers
quoted above. It is also an admitted fact that the previous writ
petition filed by the appellant was disposed of in the year 2006.
Thereafter twice the appellant filed contempt petitions, which were
dismissed in the year 2008 and 2009 respectively. After about 10
years, in the year 2019 he filed another writ petition, which came
to be dismissed vide order dated 9.7.2020.
The learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ
petition rightly observed that recruitment in question relates to
the year 1998-99, whereas the petitioner filed the writ petition
seeking appointment on the post of PTI Grade-II in the year 2019
i.e. after a delay of 20 years.
(4 of 4) [SAW-238/2021]
We are in agreement with the observations made by
the learned Single Judge.
Thus, we find no force in this appeal and the same
being bereft of any merit is liable to be dismissed, which stands
dismissed accordingly.
Consequent upon the dismissal of the appeal, the stay
application also stands dismissed accordingly.
(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J (PRAKASH GUPTA),J
DK/20
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
