Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Praveen Khadgawat vs The Rajasthan State Road Transport ... on 19 September, 2024
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2024:RJ-JD:38904]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15710/2024
Praveen Khadgawat S/o Murlidhar Khadgawat, Aged About 44
Years, Botra Complex, Mal Godam Road, Bikaner.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Chomu
House, Parivahan Marg, Jaipur Through Its Chairman And
Managing Director.
2. The Executive Director (Traffic/ Institution), Rajasthan
State Road Transport Corporation, Parivahan Marg, Jaipur.
3. The Chief Depot Manager, Rajasthan State Road Transport
Corporation, Bikaner Depot, Bikaner.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jaipal Singh
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
19/09/2024
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by a
judgment dated 20.11.2001 rendered by the Division Bench of this
Court at Jaipur Bench in a batch of appeals led by Bhagwan
Singh Vs. RSRTC Jaipur & Ors. (D.B. Special Appeal Writ
No.1/2001), which was affirmed by the Full Bench of this Court
at Jaipur Bench vide judgment dated 24.10.2007 rendered in a
batch of writ petitions headed by Munna Lal Sharma Vs. The
Managing Director, RSRTC & Anr. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.144/2007).
[2024:RJ-JD:38904] (2 of 3) [CW-15710/2024]
2. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the
petitioner that despite repeated circulars/orders dated 16.10.2008
(Annexure-4) and 28.12.2022 (Annexure-5) issued by the
Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Head Office Jaipur in
compliance of the judgments ibid; the respondent No.3 did not
comply with the same and directed the petitioner to work as
Conductor vide order dated 28.07.2024 (Annexure-7) irrespective
of the fact that junior person to him are still working as Booking
Clerk/LDC.
3. In continuation of the above, learned counsel for the
petitioner makes a prayer that instead of deciding the writ petition
on merits the respondent No.3 may be directed to reassign the
work of the Bill Section to the petitioner as mentioned in the order
dated 03.10.2023 (Annexure-6), which has been passed in
accordance with the prevailing rules, guidelines, circulars/orders
dated 16.10.2008 (Annexure-4) and 28.12.2022 (Annexure-5) as
well as in the light of judgments rendered in the cases of
Bhagwan Singh (supra) and Munna Lal Sharma (supra).
4. The prayer seems to be genuine.
5. In this view of the matter, this Court deems it appropriate
to dispose of the instant writ petition in the light of judgments
passed in the cases of Bhagwan Singh (supra) and Munna Lal
Sharma (supra).
6. However, the respondent No.3 is directed to reassign the
work of the Bill Section to the petitioner as mentioned in the order
dated 03.10.2023 (Annexure-6), if the same has been passed in
accordance with the prevailing rules, guidelines, circulars/orders
[2024:RJ-JD:38904] (3 of 3) [CW-15710/2024]
dated 16.10.2008 (Annexure-4) and 28.12.2022 (Annexure-5) as
well as in the light of judgments rendered in the cases of
Bhagwan Singh (supra) and Munna Lal Sharma (supra).
7. Needful shall be done within a period of 30 days from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. 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.
9. Needless to say that the petitioner is not precluded from
approaching this Court again in case his grievance would persist.
10. With these observations and directions, the writ petition
as well as stay petition are disposed of.
(FARJAND ALI),J
Abhishek Kumar
S.No.201
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
