Pramod Kumar Jain vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 4551 Raj

[2023/RJJD/014930]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6509/2023

1. Pramod Kumar Jain S/o Ramesh Chand Jain, Aged About 63 Years, R/o Dayal Beej Store, Opposite Ioc Petrol Pump, Bajariya, District Sawaimadhopur, Rajasthan.

2. Radheshyam Sonwal S/o Nahanu Ram Sonwal, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Ward No. 5, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur Byepass, Dausa, Rajasthan.

3. Mukesh Chand Chaturvedi S/o Mangi Lal Chaturvedi, Aged About 57 Years, R/o Mathura Bhawan, Nadiya Mohalla, Ganga Mandir Ke Pass, Bharatpur, Rajasthan.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary, Government Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Education Secretary, Govt. Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

3. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary Department Of Personnel And Training Government Secretariat, Jaipur.

4. The Secretary (Finance), Finance Department, State Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.

5. The Deputy Secretary, Department Of Administrative Reforms (Group-3), Secretariat, Jaipur.

6. The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

7. The Director, Department Of Sanskrit Education, Shiksha Sankul, Jaipur.

8. The District Education Officer, Secondary Education, Bundi.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hansraj Nimbar Mr. R.P. Saini through VC For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hemant Choudhary, G.C.

Mr. Vishal Jangid, Dy.G.C.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

[2023/RJJD/014930] (2 of 3) [CW-6509/2023]

Order

12/05/2023

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in similar

circumstances and similar matters, the Division Bench of this

Court in The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan,

Bikaner Vs. Narendra Kumar Boolchandani & Ors.; D.B.

Special Appeal Writ No.362/2020 along with connected

matters, while considering the aspect that the issue in question

has arisen in large number of cases and the Government has

accepted the stand and granted the benefits, disposed of the

appeals with the following directions:-

"Learned counsel for the petitioners, however, submitted that the issue is arising in large number of cases and in several departments, the Government has accepted the stand and granted the benefits. If the petitioners are not granted similar benefits, it would amount to discriminatory treatment. Whatever be the grievance of the petitioners they can be resolved at the level of the administration or by the Court through bipartite hearing. In view of the peculiar circumstances, these appeals are disposed of by permitting the Government to take into account the representations already made or to be filed by any of the petitioners within one month. In the process, the authorities will bear in mind the stand taken by the department in similar cases. Such representations would be decided in accordance with law unmindful of the observations and directions issued by the learned Single Judge in the impugned orders. Eventually, if the grievances of the petitioner still survive after the Government decision, it is open for the petitioners to seeks redressal thereafter in accordance with law."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present

writ petition of the petitioners may also be disposed of in light of

the abovementioned judgment.

[2023/RJJD/014930] (3 of 3) [CW-6509/2023]

3. In view of the submissions made, the present writ petition is

disposed of with the same directions as issued by the Division

Bench of this Court in the case of Narendra Kumar

Boolchandani (supra).

4. 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 86-/Vivek/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)