Krishna Gopal Bohra vs The State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 8012 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1584/2020

Krishna Gopal Bohra S/o Shri Gopi Krishna Bohra, Aged About 51 Years, R/o Inside Bohra Ki Pole, Khanda Phalsa, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan, through its Principal Secretary, Ministry Of Skill Development And Entrepreneurship, Through Its Secretary, Government Of Rajasthan, Jodhpur.

2. The Directorate Of Training, Ministry Of Skill Development And Entrepreneurship, through its Secretary, Government Of Rajasthan, Jodhpur.

3. The Industrial Training Institute, through its Principal, Pratap Nagar, Airport Road, Khempura, Udaipur, Rajasthan, Pin Code- 313001.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Laxmi Bohra For Respondent(s) : Mr. Brajesh Purohit, Dy.G.C

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

26/05/2022

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

controversy in question has now been decided by the Division

Bench in the case of Shyam Lal Tailor v. State of Rajasthan &

Ors. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1025/2020) (decided on

05.03.2022).

The Division Bench in Shyam Lal Tailor's case (supra), held

as under:-

"In cases of those employees who have been appointed before 16.07.1991 and were possessed

(2 of 2) [CW-1584/2020]

of the eligibility criteria vide amended notification dated 08.07.2009, they would be entitled to regular appointment only from the date of issuance of order of regular appointment and not before that. In other words, the scheme of the rules, after amendment vide notification dated 18.02.2019, clearly has two classes, i.e. those employees, who were appointed on or before 16.07.1991 and those who were appointed after 16.07.1991.

As an upshot, of above after discussion and analysis of statutory scheme, though, the petitioners having been appointed after 16.07.1991, i.e. in the year 1993 and possessed of eligibility criteria as per amended notification dated 18.05.1999 would be entitled to regular appointment from the date of their order of appointments i.e. date of initial appointments. They are entitled to seniority also from the date of initial appointments with all consequential benefit of seniority from that date.

Petitions are accordingly allowed in the manner and to the extent indicated above."

Learned counsel for the respondents does not refute the

above submission.

In view of the submissions made, the present writ petition is

allowed in terms of the judgment as passed in Shyam Lal

Tailor's case (supra).

All the pending applications also stand disposed of.

(REKHA BORANA),J 50-Dharmendra/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)