Deen Dayal Sharma vs Maharana Pratap University Of ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 4284 Raj

[2023/RJJD/014124]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16392/2022

1. Dr. Deen Dayal Sharma S/o Late Shri Shyam Lal Ji, Aged About 71 Years, R/o House No. 1473, Mali Colony, Near Umar Well, Udaipur, Rajasthan.

2. Dr. R.C. Dadheech S/o Shri Badri Prasad Ji Dadheech, Aged About 72 Years, R/o House No. 95, Vidhya Nagar, Sector 4, Hiran Magri, Udaipur, Rajasthan.

3. Dr. Mansoor Ali Shah S/o Shri Saifuddin Shah Ji, Aged About 71 Years, R/o House No 1/656, Ramdas Ji Ki Badi, Chungi Naka, Fatehpura, Udaipur, Rajasthan.

----Petitioners Versus

1. Maharana Pratap University Of Agriculture And Technology, Udaipur, Through Its Vice Chancellor.

2. Registrar, Maharana Pratap University Of Agriculture And Technology, Udaipur.

                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Nihar Jain
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Mrigraj Singh Rathore

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

09/05/2023

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The present writ petition has been filed with the following

prayers : -

"A. By an appropriate writ order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to change the date of eligibility from the actual due date of promotion on the post of Professor as accorded to similarly situated Teachers in the pursuance of order dated 11/13.08.2015 (Annex.11).

B. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to grant the petitioners all the financial benefits from their actual due date of promotion on the post of Professor (as their promotion is due prior to 31.12.2008) along with the interest of 18% P.A. as given to similar situated candidates by the order dated 11/13.08.2015(Annex.11).

[2023/RJJD/014124] (2 of 3) [CW-16392/2022]

C. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to consider and grant the benefit to the petitioners in the light of judgment passed in the SBCW No.1749/2018 titled Dr. Ashok Kumar Vs. MPUAT decided on 27.01.2022 (Annex.12) along with all consequential benefits."

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this Court in

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1749/2018 (Dr. Ashok Kumar &

Ors. V/s Maharana Pratap University of Agriculture and

Technology, Udaipur & Anr.) decided vide order dated

27.01.2022 has disposed of the writ petition in the following

terms:-

"It is clear on record that the cases of the present petitioners were not forwarded by the University for sanction or for reconsideration by the Review Committee because of the fact that they did not raise the grievance at the relevant point of time. Th University has not specifically denied the fact that they too were eligible from a date prior to 01.01.2009. Therefore, it can be safely concluded that the case of the petitioners too deserve reconsideration by the Review Committee and for the same, the process is required to be initiated by the University as the case of the present petitioners is not different from the 24 candidates who have been granted the same benefit.

So far as the delay on the part of the petitioners is concerned, they are the persons who retired during the period of 2009-2010 and therefore, the reason as pleaded by them that they were not aware of the subsequent order of the University seems to be plausible and reasonable. Even otherwise, no discrimination can be permitted between two set of employees standing on the same footing.

In view of the above observations, the respondents are directed to initiate the process of forwarding the case of the present petitioners for reconsideration by the Review Promotional Committee after due sanction being obtained from the State Government. The Review Committee is directed to consider the cases of the petitioners in accordance with law and the rules governing the matter and pass an order thereafter. The complete exercise be completed by the University and the

[2023/RJJD/014124] (3 of 3) [CW-16392/2022]

Review Committee within a period of three months from today.

With these observations, the present writ petition is disposed of."

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the case of

the present petitioners is not distinguishable from the case of Dr.

Ashok Kumar(supra). He, therefore, prays that the present writ

petition may be allowed and the benefits granted to Dr. Ashok

Kumar(supra) may also be granted to the petitioners.

Learned counsel for the respondent-University is not in a

position to distinguish the case of the present petitioners vis-a-vis

the case of Dr. Ashok Kumar(supra) and is unable to controvert

the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that the

petitioners have raised their grievance after a long delay and,

therefore, they are not entitled to the same relief.

This Court takes note of the fact that the point of delay has

also been considered in the judgment of Dr. Ashok Kumar(supra).

In view of the submissions made before this Court, the

present writ petition is also disposed of in terms of the order dated

27.01.2022 passed by this Court in the case of Dr. Ashok

Kumar(supra).

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 15-SunilS/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)