SBCWP4767/2006 // 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4767/2006 Gauri Shanker Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan and Others Date of Order ::: 15.03.2010 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq Shri Gauri Shanker Singh, petitioner present-in- person Ms. Anita Agarwal for Shri G.K. Garg, Counsel for respondents #### By the Court:- Heard petitioner in-person and learned counsel for respondents. This matter was out of turn listed for hearing in view of observation made by the Supreme Court in its order dated 07.01.2010 passed in Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.1051/2010 whereby this Court was requested to dispose of present writ petition at an early date. Petitioner made several arguments and his basic argument is that he was harassed and humiliated at the hands of contesting respondents inasmuch as no charge against him was found proved in disciplinary enquiry, yet disciplinary authority, without supplying him enquiry report and dissenting note, terminated SBCWP4767/2006 // 2 // his services. He filed a writ petition against order of termination dated 31.01.1990 which was quashed by judgment dated 25.08.1995 of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.841/1990 and matter was remanded enabling the respondents to comply with provisions of Regulation 12(2)(i) of the Rajasthan Cooperative Dairy Federation (Disciplinary Action & Appeals) Regulations, 1980. The disciplinary authority in subsequently passed order dated 07.06.1997 again held the petitioner guilty of seven charges. Although findings in the report on all seven charges are favourable to the petitioner yet, according to the submissions made by petitioner, the writ petition filed by him against the order of penalty dated 07.06.1997, was dismissed. The petitioner filed Special Appeal No.1123/2006. The petitioner argued that this Court was misled by respondents to passing of aforesaid judgment and that sequence of events would show that petitioner has been repeatedly harassed for last 26 years and therefore he has in this writ petition prayed that respondents be directed to take necessary penal action against those authorities who have corruptly and maliciously passed various orders against him and they be directed to pay suitable amount by way of damages. SBCWP4767/2006 // 3 // I am afraid so long as the order of penalty passed by respondents stands in view of judgment dated 08.08.2006 passed by this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2960/1998, by which order of penalty passed against petitioner has been upheld, no such relief can be granted to him. Although the petitioner, who is arguing in person, may have perception that writ petition has not been rightly decided or that the judgment was not in conformity with law but the remedy there-against is appeal before Division Bench which has already been availed of by him. The Division Bench is seized with the main matter, and sitting singly in a Coordinate Bench, I cannot comment on the legality or otherwise of the judgment dated 08.08.2006. In view of such a factual situation, no relief as prayed for in the present writ petition, can be granted to the petitioner. The writ petition is therefore dismissed. (Mohammad Rafiq) J. //Jaiman//