Kapil vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 4160 Raj

[2023/RJJD/013830]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19559/2022

1. Kapil S/o Shri Rupa Ram, Aged About 34 Years, Resident Of Sojat City, District Pali (Raj.).

2. Mahesh Tak S/o Shri Vishnulal Tak, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of Chougaliyon Ka Baas, Sojat City, District Pali (Raj.).

3. Prashant Sharma S/o Shri Mahesh Kumar Joshi, Aged About 39 Years, Resident Of Outside Jodhpuriya Gate, Sojat City, District Pali (Raj.).

4. Deepak Mohil S/o Shri Vijayraj Mohit, Aged About 39 Years, Resident Of Chougariyon Ka Baas, Sojat City, District Pali (Raj.).

----Petitioners Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Director, Local Self Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The Deputy Secretary, Personnel (Ka-V) Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

3. The Municipal Board Sojat, Through Its Executive Officer.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Twinkle Purohit for Mr. Sanjeet Purohit For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Parihar

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

05/05/2023

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the

issue raised by the petitioners in the present writ petition is

squarely covered by judgment in the case of Jitendra Kumar Tailor

v. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.1952/2019, decided on 06.07.2020, which in turn had relied

[2023/RJJD/013830] (2 of 2) [CW-19559/2022]

on order in the case of Roshan Lal Saini v. State & Ors. : S.B. Civil

Writ Petition No.18056/2015, decided on 09.03.2017.

In the case of Jitendra Kumar Tailor (supra), a coordinate

Bench of this Court inter alia directed as under:

"In this view of the matter, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the State Govt. to decide the matter at the earliest to facilitate issuance of requisite order of regularization of petitioner's services, strictly in accordance with law. The requisite exercise be undertaken by the State Govt. at the earliest, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date presentation of this order."

Learned counsel for the respondents, is not in a position to

dispute the fact that the issue raised in the present writ petition is

covered by judgment in the case of Jitendra Kumar Tailor (supra).

In view of the above fact situation, the writ petition filed by

the petitioners is disposed of, in light of and with similar directions

as given in the case of Jitendra Kumar Tailor (supra).

The stay petition also stands disposed of.

The order has been passed based on the submissions made

in the petition, the respondents would be free to examine the

veracity of the submissions made in the petition and only in case,

the averments made therein are found to be correct, the

petitioners would be entitled to the relief.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 231-Shahenshah/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)