Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 2906 (RAJ)

Satya Pal Singh v. Atul Pareek

2019-11-27

ASHOK KUMAR GAUR, G.R. MOOLCHANDANI

body2019
JUDGMENT 1. The instant miscellaneous application has been filed by the applicants for modification/recalling of the order dated 20th December, 2018 passed in DB Writ Miscellaneous Application No.470/2018. 2. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that initially SB Civil Writ Petition No.6237/2013 was filed by two petitioners, namely, Devendra Chowhan and Yogesh Kumar Sharma and learned Single Bench of this Court, vide its order dated 30th May, 2017, allowed the said writ petition and the orders dated 1st February, 2013 and 1st April, 2013 were quashed and the State was directed to convene the Review DPC and to consider the case of the petitioners in accordance with seniority and eligibility as per the Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules, 1965 (for short "the Rules of 1965") with reference to the year 2013-14. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants Dr.Saugath Roy submitted that the said order dated 30th May, 2017 was challenged before the Division Bench by filing DB Special Appeal (W) No.1800/2017 and the Division Bench, vide its order dated 21st December, 2017, dismissed the appeal filed by the State. 4. Learned counsel submitted that the State further filed Special Leave Petition No.12945/2019 (The State of Rajasthan & Anr. Vs. Narendra Singh Rathore & Ors.) before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the same also came to be dismissed vide order dated 6th May, 2019. 5. Learned counsel submitted that some of the persons sought clarification of the order passed by the Division Bench and as such, the Division Bench in DB Miscellaneous Application Nos.470/2018, 96189/2018 & 96192/2018, observed by making certain clarifications in the original order passed by the Division Bench. 6. Learned counsel submitted that in Para No.3 of the order in the aforesaid applications was passed on 20th December, 2018. The Division Bench has observed by making clarification that any promotions made pursuant to the DPC, held prior to the year 2013-14, are not to be disturbed while implementing the decision dated 30th May, 2017 passed by the Single Bench and upheld by the Division Bench. 7. The Division Bench has observed by making clarification that any promotions made pursuant to the DPC, held prior to the year 2013-14, are not to be disturbed while implementing the decision dated 30th May, 2017 passed by the Single Bench and upheld by the Division Bench. 7. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that it is the Division Bench, while passing the order in miscellaneous application on 20th December, 2018, has in fact affected the rights of the applicants and the Review DPC, which is to be held, will consider the cases of the applicants but will be governed by the observations of not disturbing the candidates while implementing the decision passed by the Single Bench on 30th May, 2017. 8. Learned counsel submitted that various applications have been filed before the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, whereby directions have been sought for proper determination of the vacancies and the Review DPC to be convened by the State for the vacancies of the year from 1991 to 2010. 9. Learned counsel submitted that in case the clarification order dated 20th December, 2018 is given effect, the rights of the applicants will be seriously prejudiced. We have heard learned counsel of the applicants and perused the record of the case. 10. We find that the order passed by the Single Bench in SB Civil Writ Petition No.6237/2017 was to the extent of holding the meeting of Review DPC for the year 2013-14 keeping in mind the Rules of 1965 and giving due weightage to seniority and eligibility, as per the Rules of 1965. 11. We further find that decision of the Single Bench has been upheld by the Division Bench while passing the order dated 21st December, 2017. 12. We find that clarification, which has been given by this Court while passing the order dated 20th December, 2018, only reiterates the view, which was earlier taken while deciding the special appeal. 13. We are afraid to accept the submission of learned counsel for the applicants that clarification made by this Court, will in any manner affect the rights of the persons, who are due for promotion for the preceding years. 14. We do not find that the order passed by this Court on 20th December, 2018 needs any modification/recalling and as such, the miscellaneous application is not entertained and the same is dismissed.