1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6263/1996 Smt. Rajani Bhola vs. State & Anr. Date of order : 11/7/2008. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri R.P. Vijay for the petitioner. Smt. Parinitoo Jain, Dy. Govt. Counsel for the State. ****** Prayer has been made in the writ petition that the respondents be directed to pass an order posting the petitioner on the post of Teacher Gr.II (Science) and they may be further directed to make payment of salary to the petitioner for the intervening period. It has been pointed out by the respondents that during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner was posted as Teacher Gr.III (Science) vide order dated 24.2.1997. For the disputed period while the petitioner has asserted that she continued to report to the Additional Collector, Baran and that even though she was selected for Senior Teacher (Science) the District Educational Officer in order to favour others posted her as Hostel Superintendent, Shahbad in District 2 Baran. The petitioner though gave her joining report to Additional Collector, Baran on 30.3.1995 and simultaneously requested the District Educational Officer for grant of leave for 15 days. She then made a representation on 8.6.1995 for posting her as Senior Teacher (Science). The order of her appointment dated 15.3.1995 made it clear that this order would be effective till the end of the session, but in spite of new session, the petitioner was not given fresh posting. Therefore, petitioner again represented the District Education Officer for fresh posting. The respondents vide order dated 22/24.4.1996 required the petitioner to report on the post of Hostel Superintendent and threatened that in the event of her non joining, they would take disciplinary action against her. The contention of the petitioner is that her posting as Hostel Superintendent was only upto 15.3.1995 and on reopening of the new session, the respondents were required to give her fresh posting. She could not assume to have been 3 continued in her old posting as Hostel Superintendent, Baran. It is against the back drop of these facts that the writ petition has been filed with the prayer that the respondents be directed to give her posting as Teacher Gr.II (Science) and be further directed not to make discrimination against her in the matter of posting and post her at any nearby place of Kota. The respondents have opposed the writ petition and have raised a preliminary objection that petitioner has not come with clean hands and concealed the fact. She has tried to depict an altogether different picture than what is the reality. In fact, the petitioner having joined at Baran, worked there only upto 30.3.1995. Thereafter absented for one year and continued to remain absent upto 30.4.1996. She rejoined then and that too after notice was issued to her for initiating disciplinary action. It has been contended that the petitioner, just because she had submitted an application, could not assume 4 that she would not be posted anywhere all this time and that her posting as Hostel Superintendent, Baran could not be taken by her as cancelled on her own. In fact, petitioner did not join at Shahbad as Hostel Superintendent and pursued the matter for her fresh posting at the place of her choice. It is contended that on one hand the petitioner is claiming new posting and on the other hand, on months together she did not attend duty and during the interregnum period, kept on representing respondent authority for change of her posting, such petitioner ought not to be granted any relief. Controversy involved in the present case, in view of the prayers made, is only confined to posting the petitioner as Teacher Gr.II (Science) and since posting has now been given, that part of the prayer has become infructuous. When the petitioner remained absent during the period of 13 months, the other relief that the respondents be directed to make payment of salary for all this period, cannot be 5 granted. However it would be open for the respondents that if any such representation is made by the petitioner, while proceedings against the petitioner for the period of absence, to decide as to in what manner this period of absence is regularised. The writ petition is dismissed with the aforesaid direction. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/