Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Gayatri Soni vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 23 February, 2023
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
[2023/RJJD/005960] (1 of 2) [CW-17545/2022]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17545/2022
Gayatri Soni D/o Shri Shiv Ratan Soni, W/o Shri Mahesh Soni,
Aged About 30 Years, Neem Ka Chowk, Sadar Bazar, Karoi Kalan,
Tehsil And District Bhilwara. Presently Posted On The Post Of Ldc
At Panchayat Samiti Javli, District Udaipur (Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj
(Panchayati Raj), Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
2. Additional Commissioner, Rural Development And
Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan,
Jaipur.
3. District Programme Coordinator And Districtd Collector,
Udaipur, Rajasthan.
4. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Udaipur, Rajasthan.
5. Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Mavli, District
Udaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Gayatri Soni (Present in person)
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
23/02/2023
The petitioner present in person submits that a similar order
was passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court for a
similarly situated person in the matter of Basti Ram Vs. State of
Rajasthan (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5405/2022) decided
on 19.01.2023. The order dated 19.01.2023 reads as follows:-
"1. Mr. Pawan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner
submitted that the issue involved in this petition is
squarely covered by judgment dated 21.03.2022, passed
in the case of Lalita Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors in S.B.
Civil Writ Petition No.12857/2021.
(Downloaded on 24/02/2023 at 12:03:07 AM)
[2023/RJJD/005960] (2 of 2) [CW-17545/2022]
2. Mr. Piyush Bhandari, learned counsel appearing for the
respondents is not in a position to dispute the aforesaid
fact.
3. In the case of Lalita (supra), a co-ordinate Bench of
this Court has held thus:
"Consequently, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is
allowed. The order dated 12.07.2021 (Annex.12) is quashed
and set aside. The respondents are directed to accord
notional benefits to the petitioner on the post of LDC, as has
been accorded to similarly situated candidates vide
Annex.13. Needful may be done by the respondents within a
period of six weeks from the date of this order."
4. In view of the aforesaid, the present writ petition is
also allowed and the communication dated 06.10.2021
(Annex.10) is hereby quashed and the respondents are
directed to accord notional benefits to the petitioner on
the post of LDC, as has been accorded to similarly
situated candidates. Needful may be done by the
respondents within a period of six weeks from the date
of this order.
5. The stay petition also stands disposed of."
The petitioner present in person further submits that her
case is squarely covered by the aforesaid order.
In light of such submissions, the present petition is disposed
of with a direction to the respondents to decide the representation
of the petitioner, while keeping into consideration the order passed
in Basti Ram (supra), by passing a speaking order within a
period of thirty days from today, strictly in accordance with law.
All pending applications also stand disposed of.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
78-/Jitender//-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
