Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 595 (RAJ)

Surendra Nath v. State of Rajasthan

2005-02-22

R.P.VYAS

body2005
Judgment R.P. Vyas, J.-The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction against the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner for the purpose of appointment on the post of Teacher Grade III in pursuance of select list dated 28.5.1990 (Annex. 1) w.e.f. from the date the persons lesser meritorious than the petitioner have been so appointed with all consequential benefits. 2. The brief facts of the case are that an advertisement No. 2/90 was issued by the respondents in Rajasthan Patrika dated 25.1990 inviting applications for appointment on the post of teachers in Primary Schools within the territories of Panchayat Samiti, Loonkaransar. 3. The petitioner being eligible for appointment on the post of Teacher in Primary Schools, the petitioner also applied for the same and was selected. 4. Further case of the petitioner is that the Administration, Finance and Taxation Standing Committee of the Panchayat Samiti, Loonkaransar vide its resolution dated 28.5.1990 accorded its approval to the appointment of the petitioner and others. In the resolution, the name of the petitioner was incorporated at serial No. 33 in the category of Scheduled Caste. 5. It has further been averred by the petitioner that before appointment could be given to the petitioner, a telegram was received in the Panchayat Samiti, Loonkaransar on 16.1990 stating that a decision has been taken not to make any appointment to fill in the vacant post of Teacher in pursuance of advertisement dated 25.1990. 6. Further case of the petitioner is that being aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents in not granting appointment to the petitioner, the petitioner preferred SBCWP No. 5220/1990 (Bhanwar Lal & Ors. vs. Panchayat Samiti, Loonkaransar & Ors.) with the prayer to offer appointment to the petitioner on the post of Teacher Grade III in the Panchayat Samiti, Loonkaransar against the vacant post in pursuance of advertisement dated 25.1990. This Court decided the aforesaid writ petition vide order dated 11.1997 on the ground that the appointments have already been made to the teachers and on the basis of this fact, the writ petition was dismissed as having become infructuous. 7. This Court decided the aforesaid writ petition vide order dated 11.1997 on the ground that the appointments have already been made to the teachers and on the basis of this fact, the writ petition was dismissed as having become infructuous. 7. Further case of the petitioner is that despite the order of this Court dated 11.1997, he was not offered appointment and when he made enquiry, he came to know that since a criminal case was pending against the petitioner, therefore, he was not offered appointment. 8. The petitioner has further averred in the petition that when he was not offered, he submitted number of representations, but to no avail. 9. Further case of the petitioner is that meanwhile in the criminal case pending against the petitioner, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Bikaner after trial acquitted the petitioner vide Judgment and order dated 7.2.2002 passed in Criminal Regular Case No. 259/1999 (Old No. 224/1999). 10. Further case of the petitioner is that after acquittal, he submitted a representation before the Panchayat Samiti, Loonkaransar on 19.2002 stating that since he has already been acquitted in the criminal case, therefore, he may be offered appointment on the post of Teacher Grade III pursuant to advertisement dated 25.1990 from the date persons junior to him have been so appointed. 11. Further case of the petitioner is that the petitioner submitted number of representations before the respondent-authorities. However, no heed was paid by the respondents and his grievance has not been redressed so far. 12. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner. 13. Be that as it may, during the course of argument, it has been requested by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the respondents be directed to consider the representation (Annex. 4) of the petitioner regarding his appointment on the post of Teacher Grade III pursuant to advertisement dated 25.1990 as he stood at serial No. 8 in the select list and persons junior to him have already been offered appointment. 14. 4) of the petitioner regarding his appointment on the post of Teacher Grade III pursuant to advertisement dated 25.1990 as he stood at serial No. 8 in the select list and persons junior to him have already been offered appointment. 14. Since the petitioner has been denied the appointment on the post of Teacher Grade III on account of pendency of criminal case and since the petitioner has already been acquitted, in view of this fact, in the interest of justice, I deem it just and proper to dispose of the instant petition at this stage by giving a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on the post of Teacher Grade III pursuant to the advertisement dated 25.1990. Thus, this writ petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of in the manner that the respondents are directed to consider the representation (Annex. 4) of the petitioner in accordance with law and in case the petitioner wants to file fresh representation, he is directed to file the same within a period of 15 days from today and the respondents/competent authority shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law within two months from the date of receipt of representation. If it is found that the petitioner is entitled for any relief in accordance with law, then the same may be given to the petitioner and if the petitioner is not found entitled to the relief sought for, then a brief reasoned order may be passed after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.