Bharat Kumar vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 7689 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:31720]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14065/2023

Bharat Kumar S/o Kishan Lal, Aged About 34 Years, B/c Valmiki, R/o Ward No. 33, Badopal Road, Suratgarh, District Sriganganagar (Presently Working As Computer Operator (Ldc) In Municipal Board, Suratgarh)

----Petitioner Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Local Self, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The Municipal Board, Suratgarh District Sri Ganganagar Through Its Executive Officer.

3. The Director, Department Of Local Self, Jaipur Rajasthan.

4. The Dy. Director, Regional Department Of Local Self, Bikaner Rajasthan.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Kinjal Purohit for Mr. RDSS Kharlia For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kuldeep Prajapat for Mr. Rajesh Parihar

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Order

26/09/2023

1. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the

issue raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition is

squarely covered by a 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 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.

[2023:RJ-JD:31720] (2 of 2) [CW-14065/2023]

2. In the case of Jitendra Kumar Tailor (supra), a Co-ordinate

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."

3. 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 the judgment in the case of Jitendra Kumar Tailor

(supra).

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

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

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

5. 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 petitioner

would be entitled to the relief.

6. The stay petition also stands disposed of accordingly.

(DINESH MEHTA),J 103-Arvind/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)