Rajasthan Public Service ... vs Navin Kumar Choubisa ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 4449 Raj

[2023/RJJD/014780]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 834/2019

1. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary.

2. The Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Gughra Ghati, Ajmer.

----Appellants

Versus

1. Megha Shah D/o Shri Kumarpal Singh, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Vpo Punali, Tehsil Dungarpur, District Dungarpur.

2. State Of Rajasthan Through The Secretary, Department Of Secondary, Education, Jaipur.

3. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner.

4. The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

----Respondents

CONNECTED WITH

D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 512/2019

Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary

----Appellant

Versus

1. Navin Kumar Choubisa S/o Shri Parmanand Chobisa, Aged About 38 Years, Village Post Salumber, District Udaipur.

2. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Secondary Education, Jaipur.

3. The Secretary, Elementary Education, Jaipur.

4. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner.

5. The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

----Respondents

D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1188/2019 Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary.

----Appellant Versus

1. Shaitan Singh S/o Shri Ram Narayan Rathore, Resident Of Near Purana Mahal, Inside Rasala, Dhan Mata Mandir Ke

[2023/RJJD/014780] (2 of 4) [SAW-834/2019]

Niche, Dungarpur.

2. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Secondary Education, Jaipur.

3. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner.

4. The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1242/2019 Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary.

----Appellant Versus

1. Dev Kanwar Soni D/o Shri Naval Kishore, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village Post Nai, Tehsil Girwa, District Udaipur.

2. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Secondary Education, Jaipur.

----Respondents D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1388/2019 Rajasthan Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary

----Appellant Versus

1. Smt. Minakshi Joshi D/o Shri Bhagwati Shanker W/o Vinod Joshi, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Ganesh Chouk, Village Talwara, District Banswara.

2. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Secondary Education, Jaipur.

3. The Secretary, Elementary Education, Jaipur.

4. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner.

5. The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Tarun Joshi (through VC) Mr. Vikram Singh

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Judgment 11/05/2023

1. The matters come up for consideration of the applications

under Section 5 of the Limitation Act preferred on behalf of the

appellants in the following special appeal writs with a prayer for

[2023/RJJD/014780] (3 of 4) [SAW-834/2019]

condoning the delay in filing that appeals filed against the orders

mentioned in front of them :-

  DBSAW        Delay Filed against the order dated / passed in
   No.          of
               days
 834/2019       412    23.02.2018 / SBCWP No.11997/2015

(Megha Shah Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.) 512/2019 328 29.11.2017 / SBCWP No.14869/2015 (Navin Kumar Choubisa Vs. State Raj. & Ors.) 1188/2019 416 16.02.2018 / SBCWP No.12001/2015 (Shaitan Singh Rathore Vs. State Raj. & Ors.)

2. It is also noticed that the following special appeal writs, filed

against the orders mentioned in front of them, are also barred by

limitation, however, the application under Section 5 of the

Limitation Act have not been filed along with them :-

  DBSAW        Delay Filed against the order dated / passed in
   No.          of
               days
1242/2019       327    29.11.2017 / SBCWP No.2229/2017

(Dev Kumar Soni Vs. State of Raj. & Anr.) 1388/2019 327 29.11.2017 / SBCWP No.6962/2015 (Smt. Minakshi Joshi Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.)

3. In the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, it is

mentioned that after receiving the certified copy of the order, the

same was forwarded to the State Government with an opinion that

the order impugned be challenged before the Division Bench by

way of filing the special appeal. It is further mentioned that after

receiving sanction from the competent authority, these appeals

are filed.

4. It is noticed that no date has been mentioned as to when the

certified copies of the impugned orders were received by the

[2023/RJJD/014780] (4 of 4) [SAW-834/2019]

appellants. It is also not clarified that as to when the competent

authority granted sanction for filing the present appeals.

5. In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that

the averments made in the applications under Section 5 of the

Limitation Act are vague and the above mentioned delay in filing

the present appeals is not satisfactory explained.

6. In such circumstances, no case for condoning the delay in

filing the present appeals is made out, hence, the applications

under Section 5 of the Limitation Act are dismissed.

7. Consequently, the special appeals being DBSAW

Nos.834/2019, 512/2019 and 1188/2019 are also dismissed.

8. In special appeals being DBSAW Nos.1242/2019 and

1388/2019, no application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act

for condoning the delay in filing that appeals have been filed,

therefore, the same are also dismissed on the ground of delay.

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J (VIJAY BISHNOI),J

Abhishek Kumar

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)