Sudhir Sharma Son Of Mr. Bajrang ... vs The Chief Secretary
2023 Latest Caselaw 24 Raj/2

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                     BENCH AT JAIPUR

                D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 821/2021

Sudhir Sharma Son Of Mr. Bajrang Lal Sharma, Aged About 36
Years,    20,   Mayur       Vihar      Jagatpura,        Malviya     Nagar,    Jaipur
(Rajasthan)
                                                                       ----Appellant
                                       Versus
1.       The Chief Secretary, The State Government Of Rajasthan
         The    State      Secretariat,          Jan      Path,     Jaipur    302005
         (Rajasthan)
2.       The Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Through Its
         Managing Director Vidyut Bhawan, Jyoti Nagar Jaipur
         302005 (Rajasthan)
3.       Chief Personnel Officer, The Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam
         Limited   Vidyut         Bhawan         Jan      Path,     Jaipur    302005
         (Rajasthan)
4.       Archna Vyas, Commercial Assistant II Posted And Working
         At The Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited Vidyut Bhawan
         Jan Path, Jaipur 302005 (Rajasthan) Resident Of Plot 19,
         Mahesh Colony II, Behind Power House, Jagatpura, Jaipur
         302017 (Rajasthan)
                                                                    ----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Hans Kumar Sharma

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. PANKAJ MITHAL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA Order

02/01/2023

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner-appellant.

2. The petitioner-appellant has preferred this appeal against the

judgment and order dated 22.02.2021, by which the learned

Single Judge has dismissed his writ petition.

3. The respondent No.4, the wife of the petitioner-appellant

was appointed as a Commercial Assistant Grade-II. The petitioner-

(2 of 2) [SAW-821/2021]

appellant challenged her appointment on the ground that she

obtained the said appointment on the basis of a decree of divorce

which had not attained finality inasmuch as the appeal against the

same was pending.

4. It is apparent that the relations of the petitioner-appellant

with his wife respondent No.4 were not cordial and therefore they

took divorce.

5. We do not find that the rules provide for any divorcee quota,

rather the terms and conditions of the appointment only stipulate

that if a person is a divorcee, he or she has to produce the decree

or certificate of divorce at the time of appointment/joining. The

respondent No.4 had a decree of Civil Court dated 23.01.2020

granting her divorce and she had produced the said decree at the

time of her appointment and joining, may be said decree was

under appeal.

6. It goes without saying that mere filing of an appeal does not

wipe of the effect of decree of divorce or make the said decree

redundant. The divorce decree, as produced by the respondent

No.4, existed on the relevant date. Therefore, she was rightly

permitted joining on its basis.

7. Moreover, the petitioner-appellant was not entitle for any

indulgence by the Writ Court as he had not approached the Writ

Court with clean intentions but to harass his wife with whom his

relations were not cordial.

8. In view of the above, we do not find any merit in this appeal

and the same is dismissed.

                                   (SHUBHA MEHTA),J                                                    (PANKAJ MITHAL),CJ

                                   KAMLESH KUMAR/RAJAT/1







Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)