Posted On by &filed under High Court, Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur.


Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Jaswant Singh vs State Of Raj. & Ors on 4 August, 2010
                                                                    Item No.11. DJ/-
                                                           SBCWP NO. 7185/2010
                                              Jaswant Singh Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.
                                                         Order dt: 04th August, 2010


                                  1/2
     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                            AT JODHPUR
                              ORDER

S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7185/2010
Jaswant Singh Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.

DATE OF ORDER :::        04th August, 2010

                            PRESENT

            HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI


Mr. Manoj Bhandari, for the petitioner.
                                   ---

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that reason

assigned in the impugned order rejecting candidatre of the petitioner

for appointment the post of Prabodhak vide Annex-7 dated

14.07.2010 that the petitioner did not possess five years continuous

teaching experience for appointment on the post of Prabodhak after

acquiring the qualification of B. Ed. Examination is incorrect because

the required qualification for appointment on the post of Prabodhak,

was only Senior Secondary, which the petitioner already possessed

and he had more than five years teaching experience as such.

However, the petitioner’s candidature has wrongly been rejected. The

impugned order though titled as ‘Speaking Order’, however, really

does not deal with the relevant facts and circumstances of the case of

the petitioner and legal position; for which the judgments have

already been pronounced by this Court.

Item No.11. DJ/-

SBCWP NO. 7185/2010
Jaswant Singh Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.

Order dt: 04th August, 2010

2/2

3. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned

counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is once again relegated back

to the said authority by making fresh representation giving all the

contentions, which he has raised here in this petition, and the said

authority is expected to pass a speaking order again in accordance

with law. It is also expected that if the petitioner is found eligible and

entitled to the relief claimed by him, the same may be given to him,

but if the petitioner is still not found eligible after dealing with all

contentions of the petitioner, the authority concerned shall pass

appropriate speaking order, preferably within three weeks from the

date of such representation filed along with certified copy of this

order, and if any adverse order is passed against the petitioner, the

petitioner will be free to avail the legal remedy under the law.

4. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Copy of this

order be sent to respondents immediately.

(DR. VINEET KOTHARI), J.

DJ/-

11


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

102 queries in 1.296 seconds.