Subhash vs State Of Raj. & Ors on 11 December, 2009

Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur

                           1

1.    S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10583/2009
      SMT. NEENA MALIK VS. STATE & ORS.

2.    S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.11530/2009
      MAHENDRA SINGH & ORS VS. STATE & ORS.

3.    S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.11523/2009
      PRAVEEN SINGH & ORS. VS. STATE & ORS.

4.    S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.11523/2009
      MANGI LAL & ORS. VS. STATE & ORS.

5.    S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.11519/2009
      KAVITA VS. STATE & ORS.

6.    S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.11517/2009
      SMT. VANDANA KUNWAR & ORS VS. STATE & ORS.

7.    S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.11506/2009
      MANOJ KUMAR DAVE & ORS. VS. STATE & ORS.

8.    S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.11496/2009
      ANITA DEORA & ORS . VS. STATE & ORS.

9.    S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.8415/2009
      GHANSHYAM PUROHIT & ORS VS. STATE & ORS.

10.   S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.9863/2009
      LAXMAN SINGH & ORS. VS. STATE & ORS.

11.   S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.8993/2009
      NARESH KUMAR & ORS. VS. STATE & ORS.

12.   S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.11484/2009
      AMAR SINGH BHAYAL & ORS VS. STATE & ORS.

13.   S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.11452/2009
      MAHIPAL & ANR VS. STATE & ORS.

14.   S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.11448/2009
      SUBAHASH & ORS VS. STATE & ORS.

15.   S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10085/2009
      MUSTAQ KHAN VS. STATE & ORS.
                              2


16.   S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10513/2009
      MALA RAM JANI & ORS. VS. STATE & ORS.

Date of order : 11.12.2009


            HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J.

S/Sh.Brijesh Pareek, AD Charan, Sandeep Shah, RS
Choudhary, AK Choudhary, SS Charan, JVS Deora, BS
Deora, PS Chundawat, HR Chawala, Rajesh Choudhary, VR
Choudhary, Srikant Verma and Sardual Bishnoifor the
petitioner(s).

Mr. RL Jangid, Addl. Advocate General for the respondent
State.

The learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the

learned counsel for the State submit that the issue raised in

these writ petitions has already been answered in the

judgment of this Court delivered in S.B.Civil Writ Petition

No.2579/09-Devendra Kumar & ors. vs. The State & ors.

and 502 connected matters decided on 15.5.2009 and,

thereafter, the Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court

at Jaipur dismissed the appeals preferred by the private

parties, therefore, these writ petitions may also be decided

in the light of the decision given in above S.B.Civil Writ

Petition No. 2579/09 as well as in the light of the decision

given in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4652/09 and connected
3

632 writ petition decided on 8.5.2009.

In view of the statement of both the learned counsel

for the parties, these writ petitions are also allowed in the

following terms:-

I. During continuation of the work, as detailed
out hereinabove, the invocation of the last
extension is arbitrary and illegal; and the
consequential automatic termination orders of
the petitioners are set aside.

II. The RPSC/DPC selected
candidates/employees are still not available
and next academic sessions is about to start;
even urgent temporary appointments under
Rule 28 of the Rules of 1971 are not possible
due to short span of one month and a half left
to start with the process of admission and
academic session, therefore, as per the aims
and objects of the Scheme, respondents are
directed to consider the cases of the
petitioners for continuation in service till
regularly selected candidates from
RPSC/persons selected and recommended by
the DPC for promotion are made available in
the light of the above observations;

III. Even in case of appropriate order of
continuation in service till regularly selected
candidates from RPSC/DPC selected persons
are available, the petitioners are not entitled
for wages of the vacations, in other words,
when the schools are closed.

IV. In case the regularly selected candidates
from RPSC/persons selected and recommended
by the DPC for promotion are made available,
then the respondents can terminate services of
the petitioners after preparation of the
seniority list on the State level as per their
4

date of appointment and merit assigned to
them, by following the principle of ‘last come
first go’ to the extent of availability of the
selected candidates and while doing so, the
respondents will keep the interest of the
present students and prospective students in
view.”

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners are

also directed to submit the court fee of Rs.25/- for each of

the petitioners in case it is a joint writ petition and certified

copy of this order may be issued to the petitioners only

subject to payment of this Court fee.

[PRAKASH TATIA], J.

cpgoyal/-

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO._______/2009

Date of order : 11.12.2009

HON’BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J.

SS/Sh.Brijesh Pareek, AD Charan, Sandeep Shah, RS
Choudhary, AK Choudhary, SS Charan, JVS Deora, BS
Deora, PS Chundawat, HR Chawala, Rajesh Choudhary, VR
Choudhary, Srikant Verma and Sardual Bishnoifor the
petitioner(s).

Mr. RL Jangid, Addl. Advocate General for the respondent
State.

This writ petition is allowed [ see separate judgment in

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10583/2009-SMT. NEENA

MALIK VS. STATE & ORS. .] decided today itself.

By orders

Court master.

Leave a Comment Cancel