Parmod Kumar Tak vs The State Of Rajasthan
2023 Latest Caselaw 707 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1005/2023

1. Parmod Kumar Tak S/o Shri Niwas Tak, Aged About 56 Years, Resident Of 121/18, Mundri Mohalla, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

2. Madhu Lata Goyal W/o Shri Nathmal Goyal, Aged About 61 Years, Resident Of 373, 19 Ragtiyagali, Nala Bazar, Ajmer Rajasthan.

3. Beena Mathur W/o Shri Rajesh Mathur, Aged About 58 Years, Resident Of 1919/1, New Kayast Colony, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

4. Kanhaiya Lal Sadhwani S/o Shri Dayal Das Sadhwani, Aged About 55 Years, Resident Of 273/11, Sindhi Topdadra, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

5. Dilip Sawlani S/o Late Shri Parmanand, Aged About 58 Years, Resident Of 99/22, Prabhu Mohalla, Nawab Ka Bera, Ajmer Rajasthan.

6. Suresh Chand Singhal S/o Shri Radheshyam, Aged About 56 Years, Resident Of Dhosi Mohalla, Ward No. 6, Deoli, Tonk Rajasthan.

7. Ashok Kumar Garg S/o Norat Mal Kandoi, Aged About 58 Years, Resident Of 2/211, P.n.b. Marg, Makarwal Road, Panchsheel Nagar, Ajmer, Rajasthan.

----Petitioners Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan.

                                                                ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :    Ms. Khushbu Choudhary
For Respondent(s)         :    Mr. Vishal Jangid





                                              (2 of 3)                [CW-1005/2023]



                     JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

                                      Order

18/01/2023

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in similar

circumstances and similar matters, the Division Bench of this

Court in The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner

Vs. Narendra Kumar Boolchandani & Ors.; D.B. Special Appeal

Writ No.362/2020 along with connected matters, while considering

the aspect that the issue in question has arisen in large number of

cases and the Government has accepted the stand and granted

the benefits, disposed of the appeals with the following

directions:-

"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 petitioner still survive after the Government

(3 of 3) [CW-1005/2023]

decision, it is open for the petitioners to seeks redressal thereafter in accordance with law."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present

writ petition of the petitioners may also be disposed of in light of

the abovementioned judgment.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents also agrees to the said

submission.

4. In view of the submissions made, the present writ petition is

disposed of with the same directions as issued by the Division

Bench of this Court in the case of Narendra Kumar Boolchandani

(supra).

(DINESH MEHTA),J 199-A.Arora/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)