Ravata Ram vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 3783 Raj

[2023/RJJD/012727] (1 of 6) [CW-1845/2023]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1845/2023

Bhagirath S/o Poonma Ram, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Poonma Ram, Jogau, Jalore, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

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

2. Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

3. Joint Director, Education Department, Pali, Mandal-Pali.

----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2700/2023 Ravata Ram S/o Poonma Ram, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Haryali, Jalore, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

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

2. Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan Bikaner.

3. Joint Director, Education Department, Pali, Mandal- Pali.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Muktesh Maheshwari For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hemant Choudhary, GC with Mr. Vishal Jangid, Dy.G.C.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

01/05/2023

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Since both the writ petitions arise out of the same cause of

action and are based on similar facts, therefore, they are being

decided by this common order.

The present writ petitions have been filed against the

suspension order dated 24.12.2022 (Annex.1) passed by Director,

[2023/RJJD/012727] (2 of 6) [CW-1845/2023]

Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner as also dismissal order

dated 13.01.2023 (Annex.3) passed by the Joint Director, School

Education Department, Pali.

Briefly, the facts necessary to be noted in the present case

are that the petitioners namely Bhagirath and Ravat Ram were

appointed as Senior Teachers in Science and Sanskrit, in Sirohi

and Jalore Districts respectively. An FIR was registered against the

petitioners at Police Station, Sukher, Udaipur on 25.12.2022,

wherein allegation was levelled against them that they were

solving the question paper of Senior Teacher Examination,

conducted by RPSC. The petitioners in pursuance of the

registration of the FIR, were sent to judicial custody. While the

petitioners were in judicial custody, an order dated 24.12.2022

was served upon them, whereby they were placed under

suspension. Subsequent thereto, they were served with another

order dated 27.12.2022 seeking their defence in the proposed

disciplinary inquiry by the department. Before the petitioners

could file their response, they were dismissed by the respondents

vide order dated 13.01.2023.

Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that once

the authorities have issued a notice seeking the response of the

petitioners in pursuance of the proposed disciplinary inquiry on

27.12.2023, then they cannot pass the order dated 13.01.2023,

whereby the petitioners have been dismissed from service without

taking recourse to the proceedings in the disciplinary inquiry.

Learned counsel also submits that once the disciplinary

proceedings have been initiated and the petitioners have been

called upon to file their defence/response, without completing the

[2023/RJJD/012727] (3 of 6) [CW-1845/2023]

same, the order dated 13.01.2023 has been passed, whereby the

petitioners were dismissed from service and it has been observed

by order dated 13.01.2023 that since the petitioner committed

grave misconduct, therefore, it is not possible to hold an inquiry

under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification,

Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the

Rules of 1958') and they are liable to be dealt with under Rule 19

(ii) of the Rules of 1958.

Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently argued that

the order passed is in gross violation of the principles of natural

justice and the situation and conditions mentioned for passing the

order dated 13.01.2023 are not in-conformity with the provisions

of Rule 19 (ii) of the Rules of 1958. He, therefore, submits that

the writ petitions may be allowed and the suspension order dated

24.12.2022 (Annex.1) and the dismissal order dated 13.01.2023

(Annex.3) may be quashed and set aside.

In support of his contention, learned counsel for the

petitioners has relied upon a judgment of this Court rendered in

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5669/2021 (Bhinya Ram Vs.

State of Rajasthan & Ors.) and other connected matter decided

on 23.05.2022.

Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents submits

that the present writ petition is not maintainable on account of the

alternate remedy available to the petitioner of filing an appeal

against the order dated 13.01.2023. He submits that Rule 23 of

the Rules of 1958 provides for the statutory appeal for redressal of

grievances of the petitioners in this case. Since alternate and

[2023/RJJD/012727] (4 of 6) [CW-1845/2023]

equally efficacious remedy of appeal is available to the petitioners,

therefore, the writ petitions may be dismissed.

To buttress his contention, learned counsel for the

respondents relied upon a judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court

rendered in S.A. Khan Vs. State of Haryana & Ors., AIR 1993

Supreme Court 1152. Learned counsel for the respondents

submits that the petitioners were prima facie found involved in

helping to dummy candidates by solving the papers in the

examinations conducted for the recruitment of Teachers Grade-II

in the State of Rajasthan. In the criminal case pending against the

petitioners, the involvement of the petitioners is prima facie made

out in adopting malpractices by a particular group who were

involved in helping the dummy candidates after the paper was

leaked. He, therefore, submits that no indulgence should be

granted to such persons much less the teacher themselves, who

are the torch bearers and nation builders of the society. He,

therefore, prays that the writ petitions may be dismissed.

I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and have

gone through the relevant record of the case.

The petitioners in the present case are teachers, they impart

education, Sanskar to the younger generation of our country. The

petitioners were caught red handed along with the other group of

persons in a hotel at Udaipur who were solving the papers for

dummy candidates. The petitioners are posted at Sirohi and Jalore

& there is no satisfactory explanation of the petitioners about their

presence in hotel at Udaipur more particularly with the persons,

who were involved in helping the dummy candidates and were

using unconstitutional and unethical measures for helping the

[2023/RJJD/012727] (5 of 6) [CW-1845/2023]

candidates in the examination for Teacher recruitment in the State

of Rajasthan. Therefore, such persons like the petitioners who are

involved in malpractices, unconstitutional and unethical acts do

not deserve any leniency in the matter.

This Court is at pains to note that nowadays, the leakage of

papers and other malpractices employed by the miscreants like

petitioners are creating havoc in the society, the honest and

genuine students' career is jeopardized by such acts and

completely demoralizing them. The involvement of teachers in

such malpractices is cause of serious concern. This Court feels

that the time has come when no sympathy and benefit of doubt

should be granted in favour of persons like petitioners. They are

required to be dealt with iron hands.

Learned counsel for the respondents informed this Court that

after detection of the above said incident in the present case, the

entire examination for recruitment of teachers has been cancelled.

The judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the

petitioners in the case of Bhinya Ram (supra) has no application

taking into consideration the gravity of charges levelled against

the petitioners in the present case.

In the considered opinion of this Court, when the statutory

alternative remedy of filing an appeal is available to the

petitioners as per the Rules of 1958, this Court is not inclined to

entertain the present writ petitions at this stage. The writ petitions

are therefore, liable to be dismissed on the ground of availability

of alternate and efficacious remedy of appeal.

In view of the discussion made herein above, the present

writ petitions are dismissed.

[2023/RJJD/012727] (6 of 6) [CW-1845/2023]

However, the appellate authority shall independently

examine the matter on its own merit without being influenced by

the observations made by this Court in this order.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 61-62-Shahenshah/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)