Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
State Of Rajasthan vs Praveen Singh ... on 7 August, 2023
Bench: Augustine George Masih, Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2023:RJ-JD:25037-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 350/2023
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Secretariat,
Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Banswara
District Banswara (Raj.)
3. The Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti Ghatol, District
Banswara.
----Appellants
Versus
Praveen Singh S/o Shri Narpat Singh, Aged About 31 Years,
Village Bishangarh District Jalore
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sunil Beniwal, AAG
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order
07/08/2023
There is a delay of 291 days in filing the appeal.
The reasons, which have been assigned for the inordinate
delay do not reflect the proper persuasion of the matter. No dates
or the manner in which the case was handled have been given.
The explanation, which has been put-forth, does not even touch
the basic requirements as are expected and required for
explaining the delay in filing the appeal. In any case this is an
inordinate delay in filing the appeal, which being unexplained does
not call for grant of benefit as has been prayed for the application
for condonation of delay.
The another aspect which has come to light is that the
judgment which has been passed by the learned Single Judge
[2023:RJ-JD:25037-DB] (2 of 2) [SAW-350/2023]
relying upon the judgment of a Coordinate Single Bench in Om
Prakash Sharma Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ
Petition No.21214/2017) pertained to the selection for the year
1986 to the post of Lower Division Clerk. In those matters,
appeals have been preferred by the Director, Secondary
Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner and the Division Bench of this Court
was pleased to dispose of the said appeals by observing as
follows:
"Learned counsel for the petitioners, however,
submitted that the issue is arising in large number of
cases and in several departments, the Government has
accepted the stand and granted the benefits. If the
petitioners are not granted similar benefits, it would
amount to discriminatory treatment. Whatever be the
grievance of the petitioners they can be resolved at the
level of the administration or by the Court through
bipartite hearing.
In view of the peculiar circumstances, these
appeals are disposed of by permitting the Government to
take into account the representations already made or to
be filed by any of the petitioners within one month. In
the process, the authorities will bear in mind the stand
taken by the department in similar cases. Such
representations would be decided in accordance with law
unmindful of the observations and directions issued by
the learned Single Judge in the impugned orders.
Eventually, if the grievances of the petitioners still
survive after the Government decision, it is open for the
petitioners to seek redressal thereafter in accordance
with law.
The appeals are disposed of accordingly."
In the light of the above, we dispose of the present appeal in
same terms as above.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH),CJ
48-Shahenshah/Anil Singh-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
