Shri Ram Meena vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 9140 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Shri Ram Meena vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 19 October, 2024

Author: Farjand Ali

Bench: Farjand Ali

[2024:RJ-JD:42783]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17534/2024

Shri Ram Meena S/o Shri Ramdhan Meena, Aged About 52 Years,
R/o Village And Post Barair, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Alwar (Raj.)
Presently Posted At, Government Primary School, Nedoli, Tehsil
Rajgarh, District Alwar.
                                                                              ----Petitioner
                                           Versus
1.       The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary
         School      Education             And     Panchayati           Raj    (Elementary
         Education) Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
         Jaipur.
2.       Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3.       Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Alwar.
4.       District Education Officer, Elementary Education Alwar.
5.       Peeo, Govt. Sr. Secondary School Ghewar, Block Rajgarh,
         District Alwar.
                                                                         ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)                :     Mr. Gajendra Singh Shekhawat
For Respondent(s)                :     -



                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

19/10/2024

1. At the outset, it is submitted by learned counsel for the

petitioner that the issue raised in the present writ petition is

covered by an order passed by this Court in the case of Suman

Jhanwar & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ

Petition No.5405/2012), decided on 12.05.2014. The operative

part of the said order is reproduced as under:-

"Therefore, the present writ petitions are disposed of with liberty and direction to the petitioners to file appropriate representation with relevant

[2024:RJ-JD:42783] (2 of 3) [CW-17534/2024]

evidence before the appointing authority, who has issued the orders of appointment to the petitioners claiming the same relief, as purportedly given to other similar situated persons. It is expected of the respondent authority to pass speaking orders after providing the opportunity of hearing to the petitioners or their authorized representative as to why similar benefit cannot be extended to them though other persons have been given such benefits. If, however, any adverse order is passed against the petitioners, the petitioners will beat liberty to avail the legal remedy available to them in accordance with law."

2. Learned counsel, therefore, prays that the petitioner may be

permitted to file a detailed representation before the competent

authorities for redressal of his grievances.

3. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of

with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation to the

competent authorities of the department and the competent

authorities of the department are directed to decide the same

within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of such

representation; and if the case of the petitioner falls within the

purview of the law laid down by this Court in the case of Suman

Jhanwar (supra); the same shall be decided in terms of the

judgment above.

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 petitioner

would be entitled to the relief sought.

[2024:RJ-JD:42783] (3 of 3) [CW-17534/2024]

5. Stay application also stands disposed of, accordingly.

(FARJAND ALI),J 150-divya/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)