Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
State Of Rajasthan vs Dheeraj Kumar ... on 31 January, 2023
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
[2023/RJJD/002981]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 184/2022
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary
Department Of Personnel And Training Government
Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Education
Department, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. Director, Primary Education, Bikaner.
4. Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner.
5. District Education Officer (Primary), Hanumangarh.
6. District Education Officer (Secondary), Hanumangarh.
7. District Education Officer (Primary), Chittorgarh.
8. District Education Officer (Secondary), Chittorgarh.
9. District Education Officer (Primary), Pratapgarh.
10. District Education Officer (Secondary), Pratapgarh.
11. District Education Officer (Primary), Prapapgarh.
12. District Education Officer (Secondary), Sawai Madhopur.
13. District Education Officer (Primary), Tonk.
14. District Education Officer (Secondary), Tonk.
15. District Education Officer (Primary), Barmer.
16. District Education Officer (Secondary), Barmer.
17. District Education Officer (Primary), Churu.
18. District Education Officer (Secondary), Churu.
19. District Education Officer (Primary), Alwar.
20. District Education Officer (Secondary), Alwar.
21. District Education Officer (Primary), Jhunjhunu.
22. District Education Officer (Secondary), Jhunjhunu.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Dheeraj Kumar S/o Brij Lal, Aged About 39 Years, Vpo
Khuiyan, Tehsil Nohar, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
2. Kuldeep Singh S/o Pratap Singh Rathore, Aged About 42
Years, R/o Vpo Birkali, Tehsil Nohar, District
Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
3. Hans Ram Bhanbhu S/o Prema Ram Bhanbhu, Aged
About 46 Years, R/o Vpo Bhukarka, Tehsil Nohar, District
Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
4. Chandra Prakash Verma S/o Nathu Lal Verma, Aged
About 37 Years, R/o Near State Bank Of India, Bajria Man
Town, District Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan.
5. Jyotsana Purohit W/o Jagdish Purohit, Aged About 43
Years, R/o 1/5 Ward No. 19, Jawahar Nagar, Pratapgarh,
District Chittorgarh, Rajasthan.
[2023/RJJD/002981] (2 of 4) [WRW-184/2022]
6. Sushila Meena D/o Devilal Meena, Aged About 44 Years,
R/o Ward No. 01, Achalpuriya, Pratapgarh, District
Pratapgarh, Rajasthan.
7. Avtar Singh S/o Hukam Singh, Aged About 38 Years, R/o
Tasai, Tehsil Kathumar, District Alwar, Rajasthan.
8. Durgeshwari Bhangura D/o Lauram Bhangura, Aged
About 36 Years, R/o Ward No. 10, Hattipura, Bhadesar,
District Chittorgarh, Rajasthan.
9. Megha Gupta D/o Om Prakash Gupta, Aged About 39
Years, R/o Sadar Bazar, Pipili Ke Pas, District Pratapgarh,
Rajasthan.
10. Pawan Kumar Sharma S/o Mal Chand, Aged About 43
Years, R/o Ward No. 11, Near By Power House Babai,
District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
11. Meena Yadav D/o Narendra Singh Yadav W/o Billu Yadav,
Aged About 43 Years, R/o Yadav Sadan Mandsaur Marg,
Nanesh Nagar, District Pratapgarh, Rajasthan.
12. Gayatri Rathore W/o Rajendra Kumar Sahu, Aged About
45 Years, R/o Makan No. 4, Ward No. 01, Abhinanadan
Nagar, District Pratapgarh, Rajasthan.
13. Kiran Dosaya D/o Banwari Lal Dosaya, Aged About 44
Years, R/o Housing Board Colony, Ward No. 07,
Nimbahera, District Chittorgarh, Rajasthan.
14. Hansa Samdani W/o Natwar Lal Nyati, Aged About 41
Years, R/o 71, Nimuch Naka, Ward No. 23, Mahaveer
Colony, District Pratapgarh, Rajasthan.
15. Yojana Rathore W/o Gajendra Kumar Taylor, Aged About
43 Years, R/o Ward No. 01, Lohar Gali, District
Pratapgarh, Rajasthan.
16. Yogesh Kumar Nainawat S/o Ramswaroop Nainawat, Aged
About 36 Years, R/o Vpo Rampur, Tehsil Bansur District
Alwar, Rajasthan.
17. Mahipal Choudhary S/o Ramoo Ram Choudhary, Aged
About 40 Years, R/o Vpo Kashmir, Tehsil Shiv, District
Barmer, Rajasthan.
18. Anita Kumari D/o Devi Singh, Aged About 37 Years, R/o
Village Rayla, Post Jharli, Tehsil Chirawa, District
Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
19. Suman D/o Ami Lal, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Village
Thimau Badi, Post Nourangpura, Tehsil Rajgarh, District
Churu, Rajasthan.
20. Sunita D/o Inder Singh, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Village
And Post Jaswantpura, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu,
Rajasthan.
21. Rekha D/o Manphool Singh, Aged About 43 Years, R/o
Village Sankhan Tal, Post Neshal Tehsil Chirawa, District
Churu, Rajasthan.
22. Shri Chand S/o Phool Chand, Aged About 43 Years, R/o
[2023/RJJD/002981] (3 of 4) [WRW-184/2022]
Village Hetamsar, Via Nau, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
23. Prakash Chandra Harijan S/o Ram Kumar, Aged About 42
Years, R/o Village Mahansar, Bissau, District Jhunjhunu,
Rajasthan.
24. Santosh Kumar Tiwari S/o Malu Ram Tiwari, Aged About
41 Years, R/o Vpo Punsisar, Mahansar, Tehsil Taranagar,
District Churu, Rajasthan.
25. Ibrahim S/o Inayat Khan, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Vpo
Gangiyasar, Via Bissau, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. K.K.Bissa
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
31/01/2023
1. The defects pointed out by the Registry are overruled.
2. The present review petition is directed against the order
dated 17.09.2020, passed by this Court in writ petition filed by the
respondents.
3. A perusal of the order under consideration reveals that
though learned counsel for the petitioners had placed reliance on
the judgment rendered in case of Ramesh Chand Saini & Ors.
Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : D.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.4253/2019) and order dated 17.05.2018, passed in the case
of Lekhraj Meena & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B.
Civil Writ Petition No.10692/2018, but the Court has not
given its verdict about the applicability of the above referred
judgments, considering that the petitioners had simply sought a
liberty to make a representation before the authorities concerned
to decide their rights in light of the judgments aforesaid.
[2023/RJJD/002981] (4 of 4) [WRW-184/2022]
4. It is pertinent that while disposing of the writ petition, this
Court has not given any finding about the petitioners' case being
covered by the judgments relied upon.
5. Hence, this Court does not find any error apparent on the
face of the record because rights of the petitioners have not been
decided. Obviously, the respondents shall be free to decide
petitioners' representation in accordance with law while
considering the referred judgments.
6. The review petition is, therefore, dismissed.
7. Stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
22-akansha/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
