1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JODHPUR.
ORDER
Smt. Ranjana Pandiya
Vs.
State of Rajasthan and Others.
S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 6779/2008
Date of Order :: 18/02/2009
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR
Mr. P.S.Chundawat, for the petitioner.
Mr. R.L.Jangid, Additional Advocate General for respondents.
BY THE COURT:
By the instant writ petition, the petitioner has
challenged the condition incorporated in the Schedule appended
to Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Prabodhak Service Rules, 2008 (for
short ‘the Rules of 2008’ hereinafter) requiring a candidate
applying for the post of Prabodhak having five years teaching
experience without any break in any Govt. recognized
educational institution/ educational project.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner
2
that the petitioner was given appointment by the Government
Mahipal Sr. Secondary School, Sagvada on temporary basis and
worked for the period as mentioned in the experience certificate
Annex.1 and thereafter in Govt. Devendra Girls Sr. Secondary
School, Dungarpur Annex.2. From the Certificate Annex.1, it
appears that the petitioner was engaged on honorarium with
effect from 19th August, 1993 to 16th March, 1994, 27th August,
1994 to 11th March, 1995, 22nd August, 1995 to 11th March 1996
and from 21st August, 1996 to 31st March, 1997 by Government
Mahipal Sr. Secondary School, Sagvada and thereafter by a
different school i.e. Govt. Devendra Girls Sr. Secondary School,
Dungarpur from October, 1997 to December, 1997, January
1998 to March, 1998 and thereafter from September, 1998 to
February 1999. The break in service in every year is of many
months. This question came to be considered by this Court in
Smt. Vishnu Kunwar Vs. State of Rajasthan and Others, SBCW
No.8796/08 decided on 21.11.2008 wherein service experience
came to be considered by this Court. The period of summer
vacation, leave availed by incumbent after leave having been
sanctioned by the employer, incumbent having consumed the
period while undergoing training for para teacher on being sent
by the State were considered to be not a break in service.
In the instant case, it is not the case of the petitioner
that the petitioner was either appointed on the post of Para
3
teacher or she was under training or she was on sanctioned
leave or she was not allowed to work for summer vacation and
therefore, in my view, the petitioner is not having five years
teaching experience as required by the Rules of 2008 and
therefore, she is not entitled for appointment on the post of
Prabodhak.
The writ petition has no force and it is therefore,
dismissed.
(H.R. PANWAR), J.
rp
4
S.B.CIVIL MISC. STAY PETITION NO. 11796/08
IN
S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 6779/08
Date of order : 18/02/2009
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR
Mr. P.S.Chundawat, for the petitioner.
Mr. R.L.Jangid, Additional Advocate General for respondents.
Since the writ petition itself has been dismissed, the
stay petition stands dismissed
(H.R. PANWAR), J.
rp