Vijaypal vs The Secretary ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 3669 Raj

[2023/RJJD/012038]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15458/2022

Vijaypal S/o Shri Mahaveer Prasad, Aged About 32 Years, Ward No. 2, Near Obc Bank, Dholipal, Tehsil Hanumangarh, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. The Secretary, Department Of Personnel Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2. The Director, Department Of Secondary Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan.

3. The District Education Officer, Hanumangarh, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.

                                                                  ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)           :    Mr. Nishant Motsara
For Respondent(s)           :



               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

Order

26/04/2023

Heard.

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the

validity of Rule 5 of the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of

Dependents of Deceased Government Servants Rules, 1996 (for

short 'the Rules of 1996').

The petitioner is essentially aggrieved with the provisions

made under Rule 5 of the Rules of 1996 that if a family member

particularly spouse or at least one of the sons, unmarried

daughters, adopted son/adopted unmarried daughter of the

deceased Government servant is already employed on regular

[2023/RJJD/012038] (2 of 2) [CW-15458/2022]

basis under the Central/any State Government or Statutory Board,

Organisation/Corporation owned or controlled wholly or partially

by Central/any State Government at the time of death of the

Government servant, then other family members of the deceased

employee except his widow cannot be granted appointment on the

compassionate ground.

It is noticed that the validity of Rule 5 of the Rules of 1996

was challenged before this Court by way of D.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.17665/2022 - Rahul Birawat Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.,

however, this Court has dismissed the aforesaid writ petition and

upheld the validity of Rule 5 of the Rules of 1996 vide judgment

dated 25.11.2022.

In view of the fact that the validity of Rule 5 of the Rules of

1996 has already been upheld by a Co-ordinate Bench of this

Court in Rahul Birawat's case (supra), the challenge of the

petitioner to the validity of Rule 5 of the Rules of 1996 fails.

Hence, the writ petition is dismissed.

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J (VIJAY BISHNOI),J

22-AjaySingh/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)