Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Teekma Ram Choudhary vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 24 May, 2023
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
[2023/RJJD/017061]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15806/2019
Teekma Ram Choudhary S/o Shri Sona Ram Choudhary, Aged
About 58 Years, R/o Bakana Kua, Garal, Tehsil And District
Barmer. At Present Block Development Officer (B.d.o) Panchayat
Samiti Khinvsar, District Nagaur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Education, Government Of Rajasthan,
Jaipur.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Rural
Development And Panchayati Raj, Government Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. The Director, Directorate Of Secondary Education,
Rajasthan, Bikaner.
4. The Joint Director (Personnel), Directorate Of Secondary
Education, Bikaner.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajesh Punia
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sarwan Kumar for Mr. Hemant
Choudhary
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
24/05/2023
I.A. No.1/2021, 2/2021 & 1/2023:
1. These applications seeking early listing of the case have
been rendered infructuous by efflux of time.
2. Dismissed accordingly.
[2023/RJJD/017061] (2 of 4) [CW-15806/2019]
I.A. No.2/2023:
1. In view of the submissions made and considering that the
controversy involved in the present case has already been
decided, the present application is allowed.
2. The matter is taken up for consideration today itself.
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15806/2019:
1. Mr. Punia, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the issue involved in the present writ petition is squarely convered
by the judgment dated 01.02.2023, passed by a Coordinate Bench
of this Court in the case of Harphool Singh Vs. The State of Raj. &
Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.15796/2019
2. Learned counsel contended that the petitioner's case is also
identical to Harphool Singh's case.
3. Mr. Sarwan Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent is not
in a position to dispute the aforesaid position of facts and law.
4. In the case of Harphool Singh (supra), the Coordinate Bench
has held thus:-
"8. This Court finds that the petitioner was
promoted after the recommendation made by
Department Promotion Committee (DPC) against
the vacant post for the year 2015-16. This Court
further finds that the Department of Panchayati
Raj also addressed communication to respondent-
Directorate of Secondary Education and stated
that many posts of BDO are lying vacant and
therefore, the department requested for grant of
proforma promotion to the petitioner.
8.1 The petitioner had no option to comply with
the promotion order, as issued in the year 2015,
as he was not relieved by the Department, where
[2023/RJJD/017061] (3 of 4) [CW-15806/2019]
he was working on deputation, for the reasons
mentioned in the communication dated
26.08.2015, as quoted above, of the Secretary to
the Government, Department of Panchayati Raj,
addressed to the parent Department of the
present petitioner. Thus, this Court is of the
opinion that the impugned action has been taken
by the respondents, without there being any fault
on the part of the petitioner, and thus, such action
of the respondents is unsustainable in the eye of
law.
9. Thus, looking into the overall facts and
circumstances of the present case and the material
placed on the record, the impugned
Communication dated 06.02.2019 (Annexure-10)
and Order dated 26.02.2019 (Annexure-11) are
quashed and set aside. The respondents are
directed to grant proforma promotion on the post
of Principal, to the petitioner, w.e.f. 16.07.2015,
with all consequential benefits, within a period of
three months from the date of receipt of certified
copy of this order.
10. The present petition stands allowed, to the
extent indicated above. All pending applications
stand disposed of."
5. Following the judgment aforesaid, the present writ petition is
also allowed. The impugned Communication dated 06.02.2019
(Annexure-11) and Order dated 27.05.2019 (Annexure-12) are
quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to grant
proforma promotion on the post of Principal, to the petitioner,
w.e.f. 16.07.2015, with all consequential benefits, within a period
of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this
order.
[2023/RJJD/017061] (4 of 4) [CW-15806/2019]
6. Stay petition also stands disposed of accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
85-Ramesh/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
