Pooja Choudhary vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 2570 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15357/2018

Pooja Choudhary D/o Shri Shishpal, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Village Ghamandiya, Tehsil Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar. Presently Working As Head Mistress At Govt. Upper Primary School, Baori Khurd, Panchayat Samiti Baori Kalan, Tehsil Phalodi, Jodhpur.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner.

3. Deputy Director, Secondary Education, Jodhpur.

4. District Education Officer, Secondary Education, Jodhpur.

5. District Education Officer, Elementary Education, Jodhpur.

6. Panchayat Elementary Education Officer, Baori Kalan, Jodhpur.

7. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Ajmer Through Its Secretary.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikas Bijarnia For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hemant Choudhary

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

14/02/2022

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the present controversy is

settled by a judgment passed by the coordinate Bench of this

Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.22546/2018; Shyam

Kumar Sharma and Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Counsel for the respondents did not refute the submission

but argued that the present petitioner was appointed in April 2018

(2 of 2) [CW-15357/2018]

and she was working as a probationer for the first two years.

Therefore, the period of three and half years as taken note of in

Shyam Kumar Sharma's judgment (supra) could not be applied

in the present matter.

Having gone through the judgment passed in Shyam

Kumar Sharma's case, it is clear that therein too the petitioners

were appointed vide order dated 20.04.2018 and taking note of

the said facts only, the Court reached to the conclusion that they

were continuing in service from the last three and half years. The

present petitioner too was appointed in April 2018 and therefore,

the facts of the present matter cannot be differentiated from that

of Shyam Kumar Sharma's case.

In view of the above, the present petition is allowed in terms

of the ratio laid down in Shyam Kumar Sharma's case. The

impugned order dated 27.09.2018 is quashed and set aside. It is

held that the petitioner is entitled to continue in service with

consequential benefits. However, she will be placed at the bottom

of the merit list.

(REKHA BORANA),J

Ashutosh-22

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)