State Of Rajasthan vs Makana Ram (2024:Rj-Jd:43953-Db)
2024 Latest Caselaw 9371 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

State Of Rajasthan vs Makana Ram (2024:Rj-Jd:43953-Db) on 24 October, 2024

Author: Rekha Borana

Bench: Rekha Borana

[2024:RJ-JD:43953-DB]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                   D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 979/2024

1.       State of Rajasthan, through Secretary, Rural Development
         and    Panchayati          Raj      Department,            Government    of
         Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2.       The Additional Commissioner, Rural Development and
         Panchayati Raj Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.
3.       District Programme Coordinator and District Collector,
         Jalore.
4.       Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Jalore District Jalore.
5.       Vikash Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti Jaswantpura, District
         Jalore.
                                                                      ----Appellants
                                        Versus
Makana Ram son of Soma Ram Grasiya, aged about 36 Years,
Village Min Taleri, Tehsil Abu Road District Sirohi.
                                                                     ----Respondent


For Appellant(s)             :     Mr. I.R. Choudhary, AAG with
                                   Mr. Pawan Bharti
For Respondent(s)            :     --



      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

24/10/2024

The present Special Appeal has been filed aggrieved of the

order dated 22.07.2022 passed in S. B. Civil Writ Petition No.

6229/2022 whereby the writ petition was allowed in light of Lalita

Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.; S. B. Civil Writ Petition No.

12857/2021 (decided on 21.03.2022).

2. The learned Single Judge while allowing the writ petition held

as under:

[2024:RJ-JD:43953-DB] (2 of 2) [SAW-979/2024]

"In view of the submissions made by the counsel for the parties and the fact that the issue raised in the present writ petition is similar to that of Lalita (supra), the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed with similar directions as given in the case of Lalita (supra). The respondents are directed to accord notional benefits to the petitioner on the post of LDC as has been accorded to similarly situated candidates i.e. from the date the persons lower in the merit than the petitioner were granted benefits."

3. It is pertinent to mention here that the judgment in Lalita's

case (supra) has not been challenged further and has hence

attained finality. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain

the present Special Appeal and the D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No.

979/2024 is hence dismissed.

4. All pending applications stand disposed of.

(REKHA BORANA),J (SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR),J 11-/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)