Rajasthan High Court
Abdul Kaleem vs State Of Raj And Ors on 27 June, 2022
Bench: Inderjeet Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4133/2018
Abdul Kaleem S/o Shri Abdul Shakoor, Village Post Chouth Ka
Barwada, Near Baag Wala Kuwan, District- Sawai Madhopur Raj.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan Through Its Secretary,
Department Of Education Rajasthan, Govt. Secretariat,
Jaipur.
2. The Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission,
Ajmer Raj.
3. Director, Primary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH
Order
27/06/2022
Instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the
following prayers:-
"It is, therefore, most humbly and
respectfully prayed your lordships may
very graciously be pleased to accept and
allow this writ petition by giving further
appropriate order or direction:-
(I) Directed to the respondents by
verifying the documents of the petitioner
to give appointment to the humble
petitioner on the post of Teacher Grade-
III Recruitment 2006.
(ii) Directed the respondents that after
given appointment to the humble
petitioner on the post of Teacher Grade-II
in recruitment 2006 the seniority of the
petitioner may be counted from the date
when they at the first time given
appointment under this advertisement to
any other person and also given the
consequential benefits.
(iii) Any other order or direction which
this Hon'ble court deems fit and proper in
(2 of 4) [CW-4133/2018]
the favour of applicants may also be
passed."
Brief facts of the case are that in pursuance to the
advertisement dated 30.10.2006 issued by the respondents, the
petitioner applied for the post of Teacher Grade-III, however after
participating in the selection process remained unsuccessful.
In the first round of litigation, the petitioner filed S.B. Civil
Writ Petition No.5394/2013 (Abdul Kaleem Vs. State of Rajasthan
& Ors.) which was decided by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court
vide order dated 10th of April, 2013 with the following directions:-
"In the light of the submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties, these
writ petitions as well as application for
clarification are decided with the
following directions:
(i) The judgment in the case of Naresh
Kumar Sharma (supra) would have no
application for the recruitment of year
2004 but would be in respect of
recruitment of year 2006 for the post of
Teacher Grade-III (Primary and Upper
Primary) only.
(ii) Consideration of candidature
pursuant to the judgment in the case of
Naresh Kumar Sharma (supra) would be
strictly against the post filled in excess
from female candidates and specified in
the judgment.
(iii) The appointment pursuant to the
direction No.(ii) would be given strictly
in order of merit irrespective of the fact
as to whether candidates, falling in merit
have approached this Court or not.
(iv) To clarify the aforesaid, the
appointment should not be given to the
less meritorious candidate in comparison
to meritorious candidate only for the
reason that meritorious candidates have
not approached this Court.
(v) It is further clarified that while
undertaking the compliance, merit of
candidates would be considered for the
primary and upper primary schools
based on qualification of B.Ed/B.S.T.C.
subject to direction Nos.(i) and (ii).
(3 of 4) [CW-4133/2018]
With the aforesaid clarification and
direction/s all the writ petitions as well
as application/s for clarification are
disposed of, so as the stay
application/s."
Again, the petitioner filed S.B. Civil Contempt Petition
No.173/2014 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5394/2013 (Abdul
Kaleem Vs. Khem Raj Secretary & Ors.), which was disposed of by
the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.12.2014
as under:-
"The contempt petition is disposed of.
(See Separate order in S.B. Civil Contempt
Petition No.770/2013, Nawal Kishore Pareek
V. K.K. Pathak & Ors. decided on
17.12.2014.)."
S.B. Civil Contempt Petition
No.770/2013, (Nawal Kishore Pareek
V. K.K. Pathak & Ors). decided on
17.12.2014:-
"Mr. S.K. Gupata -learned AAG has stated
that in compliance with the order dated
20.9.2011 and order passed by this Court
in this contempt petition from time to time,
revised select list for appointment to the
post of Upper Primary Teacher Gr. III was
prepared and those (except 7) who
submitted their documents as to their
eligibility, on due notice published, before
the RPSC have since been appointed.
Learned AAG submitted that seven of the
selected candidates who submitted
documents of eligibility have not been
appointed as their verification exercise is
under way. The verification process will be
completed in 15days from today and on
satisfaction of eligibility, they would be
appointed within 21 days from today.
Learned AAG further submits that the
revised select list of successful candidates
for appointment to the post of Primary
Teacher Grade-II has also been published
by RPSC in compliance with the judgment
dated 20.9.2011 passed by this Court. And
the appointment process of who submit
documents of their eligibility to RPSC on
due notice shall be completed within the
time frame earlier committed to before this
Court.
In view of the submissions made, the
contempt petition is accordingly disposed
(4 of 4) [CW-4133/2018]
of. Notices issued to the respondents
contemnors stand discharged."
After receiving certain information from the Department
under the Right to Information Act, which was provided in the
year 2016, the present writ petition has been filed by the
petitioner in the year 2018.
The grievance of the petitioner is that the total posts which
were advertised have not been filled by the Department and
therefore, the petitioner has legitimate claim for appointment on
the post in question and the issue with regard to reservation has
not been properly considered by the respondents while issuing the
appointment orders.
Heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.
This writ petition filed by the petitioner deserves to be
dismissed; for the reasons, firstly, in the earlier round of litigation,
the matter twice come up before the learned Single Judge, once in
the writ petition and second time in the contempt petition and
being satisfied with the reply submitted by the respondents, the
contempt petition was disposed of by the learned Single Judge
considering the full compliance made by the respondents,
secondly, the advertisement in question relates to the year 2006
and the selection process was completed in the year 2014,
therefore, at this belated stage, I am not inclined to exercise the
extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India.
Hence, the present writ petition stands dismissed.
All the pending applications stand disposed of.
(INDERJEET SINGH),J
Upendra Pratap Singh /20
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
