Kana Ram Garg vs State Of Rajasthan
2023 Latest Caselaw 6476 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3950/2023

Kana Ram Garg S/o Shri Manga Ram, Aged About 30 Years, B/c Meghwal (Sc), R/o Rohat, District Pali. Presently Working As Swasthya Margdarshak (Health Guider) In The Office Of Community Health Centre (Chc), Rohat, District Pali.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Medical And Health Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The Director (Public Health), Medical And Health Services, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

3. The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Pali.

                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :    Mr. Mahipaal Rajpurohit
For Respondent(s)          :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

28/08/2023

1. Petitioner's grievance is that he was working on contract basis

under the respondents, and they are apprehending

disengagement of his services.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

would feel satisfied if the respondents are directed to consider his

representation (which he would be filing) in light of the judgment

of this Court dated 19.01.2021, passed in Jai Prakash Ganchi &

Ors. Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.(S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.7273/2020)

and also in light of circular dated 02.09.2020.

3. The present writ petition is, therefore, disposed of with the

direction to the petitioner to file a representation, while enclosing

(2 of 2) [CW-3950/2023]

photostat copy of the judgment in the case of Jai Prakash Ghanchi

(supra) and photostat copy of the circular dated 02.09.2020 within

a period of four weeks from today.

4. In case, representation is so addressed, the competent

authority shall do the needful, in accordance with law, preferably

within a period of eight weeks from receipt thereof.

5. It is made clear that aforesaid direction to decide the

representation has been issued only with a view to ensure

expeditious redressal of petitioner's grievance. The same may not

be construed to be an order to decide the representation in a

particular manner.

6. The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.

7. The order has been passed based on the submissions made in

the petition, the respondents would be free to examine the

veracity of the submissions made in the petition and only in case,

the averments made therein are found to be correct, the petitioner

would be entitled to the relief.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 226-/Vivek/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)