State Of Rajasthan vs Ruchi Sharma (2023/Rjjd/001944)
2023 Latest Caselaw 878 Raj

[2023/RJJD/001944]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR.

....

D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 972/2022.

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department

Of Panchayati Raj, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

----Appellants

Versus

1. Ruchi Sharma D/o Sh Suresh Sharma, Aged About 40

Years, Resident Of 57, Housing Board, District Pratapgarh

2. The Tehsildar, Pratapgarh.

----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Pankaj Sharma, AAG.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI

Judgment

23/01/2023

The instant intra court appeal preferred by the State of

Rajasthan for assailing the order dated 11.05.2022 passed by the

learned Single Bench accepting the writ petition of the respondent

and directing the appellants to consider her candidature for

recruitment on the post of Teacher Gr.III (Level-I) for TSP area in

the Special Bonafide Resident Category.

[2023/RJJD/001944] (2 of 2) [SAW-972/2022]

The appeal is delayed by 80 days. An application has been

move by the learned Additional Advocate General Shri Pankaj

Sharma for condoning the delay.

We have considered the arguments advanced by the learned

Additional Advocate General and have gone through the impugned

order and the documents annexed with the writ petition.

We find that the appellants denied opportunity of selection to

the respondent in the subject recruitment process as a Bonafide

Resident of the TSP area on an absolutely hyper-technical reason.

The facts available on record clearly indicate that the respondent

was a Special Bonafide Resident of the TSP area, however, on

account of her marriage outside the TSP area, the relevant

certificate was not issued to her whereupon, she approached this

Court by filing the writ petition aforesaid which has been allowed

in the manner indicated above.

Having considered the submissions advanced by Shri Sharma

and after going through the material placed on record, we are of

the firm opinion that the view taken by the learned Single Judge

while accepting the writ petition of the respondent does not suffer

from any infirmity warranting interference in this intra court writ

appeal. Hence, the same fails on the ground of delay and so also

on merit.

(RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J

40-Mohan/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)