S.B. Civil Contempt Petition (Writ) No. 309/2006 (Santosh Kumari Ladav Vs. Raj Singh & ors.) Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. H.S. Sidhu, for the petitioner. Mr. S.K. Vyas, Government Advocate. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of the order of this Court dated 16-9-2005, the petitioner has been appointed. However, the appointment of the petitioner, as directed by this Court was to be made from the date a person junior to her has been appointed and, therefore, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the appointment of the petitioner has to relate back from the date a person junior to her was appointed. Learned Government Advocate submits that the matter is under process and a corrigendum is likely to be issued making the effective date of appointment of the petitioner from the date when a person junior to her has been appointed. In this view of the matter, there is substantial compliance of the order of this Court and, there is no deliberate or willful disobedience of the order of this Court. Therefore, the contempt petition is disposed of. The notices are discharged. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 311/2006 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. Mukesh Rajpurohit, for the petitioners. Mr. S.K. Vyas, Government Advocate. Learned counsel counsel for the parties submit that the order of this Court dated 5-4-2005 has been complied with in respect of many of the petitioners. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents submits that those who have not been made payment so far in compliance of the order of this Court, will be paid the same within a short period. In this view of the matter, there is substantial compliance of the order of this Court and thus, there is no willful and deliberate disobedience of the order of this Court. The contempt petition is, therefore, disposed of. The notices are discharged. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4471/2005 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mrs. Anupama Sharma, for the petitioner. Mr. N.M. Toshniwal, for Mr. N.M. Lodha, Addl.Advocate General. At the request, the matter is adjourned to July, 2007. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Criminal Misc. Application No.5588/2006 (DR. J.) in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.70/2006 (Hari Shanker & ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan) Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. M.A. Siddiqui, for the petitioners. Mr. B.L. Tiwari, Public Prosecutor for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioners does not want to press the petition. The petition is dismissed as not pressed. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Criminal Misc. Application No.285/2007 (DR. J.) in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.1079/2006 (Abdul Jabbar Choudhary . Vs. State of Rajasthan) Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. M.A. Siddiqui, for the petitioners. Mr. B.L. Tiwari, Public Prosecutor for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioners does not want to press the petition. The petition is dismissed as not pressed. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Restoration Application No.42/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. R.C. Joshi for Mr. Trilok Joshi, for the petitioners. By the instant application for restoration, the petitioner seeks restoration of SBCWP No.1889/2007 which came to be dismissed vide order dated 8-5-2007 in default. The application is supported by an affidavit of the counsel Mr. Trilok Joshi. The petitioner has explained the reason which prevented the counsel to appear before the Court. For the reasons mentioned in the application and the affidavit, the application for restoration is allowed and SBCWP No. 1889/2007 is restored to its original number. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Restoration Application No.49/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mrs. Anupama Sharma, for the petitioners. By the instant application for restoration, the petitioner seeks restoration of SBCWP No.2193/2007 which came to be dismissed vide order dated 21-3-1007 in default. The application is supported by an affidavit of the counsel Mrs. Anupama Sharma. The petitioner has explained the reason which prevented the counsel to appear before the Court. For the reasons mentioned in the application and the affidavit, the application for restoration is allowed and SBCWP No. 2193/2006 is restored to its original number. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Misc. Contempt Petition No. 141/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. P.S. Chundawat, for the petitioners. Put up after summer vacation. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Misc. Contempt Petition No. 186/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. Vinit Chaudhary for Mr. Harish Purohit, for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner wishes to make fresh representation. The petitioner is permitted to make a detailed representation in the light of the communication dated 30-11-2006 to the respondent Authority and if such a representation is made, the respondent authority is directed to consider and decide the same within two months therefrom in accordance with law. With these directions, the contempt petition stands disposed of. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Misc. Contempt Petition No. 198/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. Ramesh Purohit, for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner wishes to make fresh representation. The petitioner is permitted to make a detailed representation to the respondent Authority and if such a representation is made, the respondent authority is directed to consider and decide the same within two months therefrom in accordance with law. With these directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Misc. Contempt Petition No. 197/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. Vinay Jain, for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner wishes to make fresh representation. The petitioner is permitted to make a detailed representation to the respondent Authority and if such a representation is made, the respondent authority is directed to consider and decide the same within two months therefrom in accordance with law. With these directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Misc. Contempt Petition No. 190/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. Vinit Dave, for the petitioner. Issue notice to the respondents as to why action under the Contempt of Court Act may not be taken against them. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Misc. Contempt Petition No. 195/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. Ramesh Purohit, for the petitioners. Issue notice to the respondents as to why action under the Contempt of Court Act may not be taken against them. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Misc. Contempt Petition No. 200/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. H.S. Sidhu, for the petitioner. Issue notice to the respondents as to why action under the Contempt of Court Act may not be taken against them. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Criminal Jail Appeal No.633/2004 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi, for the appellant. Mr. B.L. Tiwari, Public Prosecutor. Learned Public Prosecutor prays and is granted four weeks' time for showing the cause for opposing the release of the appellant on bail. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Criminal Misc. Second Bail Application No.668/2007 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No.259/2005 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. B.S. Rathore, for the appellant. Mr. B.L. Tiwari, Public Prosecutor. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that earlier an application for suspension of sentence came to be dismissed as it was not pressed. However, it was directed to list the matter for hearing in the month of August, 2005 but despite the direction of this Court, the matter has not been listed for hearing and, therefore, the learned counsel submits that at this stage also, he does not press the application seeking suspension of sentence, but requests that the matter may be listed for final disposal in the month of July, 2007. The application seeking suspension of sentence is, therefore, dismissed as not pressed. List the matter in the month of July 2007 for final disposal. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1166/2004 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. D.K. Gaur, for the appellant. Mr. B.L. Tiwari, Public Prosecutor. Put up after summer vacation, as prayed. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3319/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. Tribhuvan Gupta, for the petitioner. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was given compassionate appointment vide order Annx.1 dated 31-3-2004, in which there was no such condition that the petitioner was required to pass the Type Test. However, vide order Annx.2 dated 14-5-2007, the petitioner has been asked to show the certificate by which she passed the Type Test else her services will be terminated. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if an opportunity is given to the petitioner, the petitioner will pass the Type Test within the period of six months. Issue notice for final disposal returnable within six weeks. Till next date, the operation and effect of the impugned order Annx.2 dated 14-5-2007 shall remain stayed. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3322/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. K.K. Shah, for the petitioner. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide order Annx.1, the petitioner was called to Walk in Interview for the post of Principal, Aavasiya School, Kushalgarh, district Banswara and accordingly he appeared in interview and was selected for deputation and in pursuance thereof he was sent on deputation vide order Annx.P/1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by the advertisement Annx.5, the petitioner is being dislodged from the deputation without obtaining the consent of the petitioner. Issue notice returnable within six weeks. Till next date, the petitioner will be allowed to continue as the Principal, Aavasiya School Khusalgarh, district Banswara. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3330/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. M.P. Goswami, for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in identical writ petition being SBCWP No.2587/2007, the notices have been issued to the respondents and by an ad interim order, the respondents have been directed to provisionally permit the petitioner therein to appear in the examination in pursuance of the notification dated 9-4-2007. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the vacancies for the post of Sub-Inspector have been advertised vide order dated 9-4-2007 by the respondent RPSC for the Examination 2007. The last vacancy was advertised for the year 2000 and for last about 6 to 7 years, the respondents neither determined the vacancies nor advertised the same and therefore in the meantime, the petitioner became overage. Had the vacancies been determined year-wise, the petitioner was well within the age. He has relied on a decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Prakash Chand etc. Vs. State of Rajasthan & ors., (1990 (2) RLR 1, as also a decision of this Court in Banshi Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan, 2007 (2) RLW 1067. Learned consel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already submitted the form for the said examination. Issue notice returnable within six weeks. In the meantime, if the examinations for the post of Sub-Inspector in pursuance of the notification dated 9-4-2007 are held by the respondents and the respondent RPSC has received the application form of the petitioner on or before the last date of submission of the application forms, the respondents are directed to provisionally permit the petitioner to appear in the said examination and the result thereof shall be subject to the decision of the writ petition. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3330/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. M.P. Goswami, for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in identical writ petition being SBCWP No.2587/2007, the notices have been issued to the respondents and by an ad interim order, the respondents have been directed to provisionally permit the petitioner therein to appear in the examination in pursuance of the notification dated 9-4-2007. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the vacancies for the post of Sub-Inspector have been advertised vide order dated 9-4-2007 by the respondent RPSC for the Examination 2007. The last vacancy was advertised for the year 2000 and for last about 6 to 7 years, the respondents neither determined the vacancies nor advertised the same and therefore in the meantime, the petitioner became overage. Had the vacancies been determined year-wise, the petitioner was well within the age. He has relied on a decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Prakash Chand etc. Vs. State of Rajasthan & ors., (1990 (2) RLR 1, as also a decision of this Court in Banshi Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan, 2007 (2) RLW 1067. Learned consel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already submitted the form for the said examination. Issue notice returnable within six weeks. In the meantime, if the examinations for the post of Sub-Inspector in pursuance of the notification dated 9-4-2007 are held by the respondents and the respondent RPSC has received the application form of the petitioner, the respondents are directed to provisionally permit the petitioner to appear in the said examination. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3333/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. R.S. Chaudhary, for the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a handicapped person and, therefore, in view of Circular No.15 (3)Pr.Su/Sam/1/2000 dated 20-7-2000 issued under the Rajasthan Employment of Physically Handicapped Persons Rules, 1976, the petitioner's case was to be considered for posting to the home district or to the place nearer to the place desired by him. The petitioner made a representation, which has not been decided by the respondents and, therefore, the respondents may be directed to consider and decide the representation expeditiously. In my view, the petitioner can be permitted to make a fresh and detailed representation to the respondents. In this view of the matter, the petitioner is permitted to make a fresh and detailed representation along with Circular dated 20-7-2000 to the respondent authority within fifteen days from today. If such a representation is made, the respondent authority shall consider and decide the same keeping in view the fact that the Circular dated 20-7-2000 provides the transfer of the physically handicapped persons to their home district or to the place nearer to the place desired by them. With these directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3334/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. R.S. Chaudhary, for the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a handicapped person and, therefore, in view of Circular No.15 (3)Pr.Su/Sam/1/2000 dated 20-7-2000 issued under the Rajasthan Employment of Physically Handicapped Persons Rules, 1976, the petitioner's case was to be considered for posting to the home district or to the place nearer to the place desired by him. The petitioner made a representation, which has not been decided by the respondents and, therefore, the respondents may be directed to consider and decide the representation expeditiously. In my view, the petitioner can be permitted to make a fresh and detailed representation to the respondents. In this view of the matter, the petitioner is permitted to make a fresh and detailed representation along with Circular dated 20-7-2000 to the respondent authority within fifteen days from today. If such a representation is made, the respondent authority shall consider and decide the same keeping in view the fact that the Circular dated 20-7-2000 provides the transfer of the physically handicapped persons to their home district or to the place nearer to the place desired by them. With these directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3336/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. R.S. Chaudhary, for the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a handicapped person and, therefore, in view of Circular No.15 (3)Pr.Su/Sam/1/2000 dated 20-7-2000 issued under the Rajasthan Employment of Physically Handicapped Persons Rules, 1976, the petitioner's case was to be considered for posting to the home district or to the place nearer to the place desired by him. The petitioner made a representation, which has not been decided by the respondents and, therefore, the respondents may be directed to consider and decide the representation expeditiously. In my view, the petitioner can be permitted to make a fresh and detailed representation to the respondents. In this view of the matter, the petitioner is permitted to make a fresh and detailed representation along with Circular dated 20-7-2000 to the respondent authority within fifteen days from today. If such a representation is made, the respondent authority shall consider and decide the same keeping in view the fact that the Circular dated 20-7-2000 provides the transfer of the physically handicapped persons to their home district or to the place nearer to the place desired by them. With these directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3337/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. R.S. Chaudhary, for the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a handicapped person and, therefore, in view of Circular No.15 (3)Pr.Su/Sam/1/2000 dated 20-7-2000 issued under the Rajasthan Employment of Physically Handicapped Persons Rules, 1976, the petitioner's case was to be considered for posting to the home district or to the place nearer to the place desired by him. The petitioner made a representation, which has not been decided by the respondents and, therefore, the respondents may be directed to consider and decide the representation expeditiously. In my view, the petitioner can be permitted to make a fresh and detailed representation to the respondents. In this view of the matter, the petitioner is permitted to make a fresh and detailed representation along with Circular dated 20-7-2000 to the respondent authority within fifteen days from today. If such a representation is made, the respondent authority shall consider and decide the same keeping in view the fact that the Circular dated 20-7-2000 provides the transfer of the physically handicapped persons to their home district or to the place nearer to the place desired by them. With these directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2951/2007 (Anil Purohit Vs. State of Rajasthan & ors.) Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. S.S. Sharma, for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in identical writ petition being SBCWP No.2587/2007, the notices have been issued to the respondents and by an ad interim order, the respondents have been directed to provisionally permit the petitioner therein to appear in the examination in pursuance of the notification dated 9-4-2007. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the vacancies for the post of Sub-Inspector have been advertised vide order dated 9-4-2007 by the respondent RPSC for the Examination 2007. The last vacancy was advertised for the year 2000 and for last about 6 to 7 years, the respondents neither determined the vacancies nor advertised the same and therefore in the meantime, the petitioner became overage. Had the vacancies been determined year-wise, the petitioner was well within the age. He has relied on a decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Prakash Chand etc. Vs. State of Rajasthan & ors., (1990 (2) RLR 1, as also a decision of this Court in Banshi Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan, 2007 (2) RLW 1067. Learned consel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already submitted the form for the said examination. Issue notice returnable within six weeks. In the meantime, if the examinations for the post of Sub-Inspector in pursuance of the notification dated 9-4-2007 are held by the respondents and the respondent RPSC has received the application form of the petitioner on or before the last date of submission of the application forms, the respondents are directed to provisionally permit the petitioner to appear in the said examination and the result thereof shall be subject to the decision of the writ petition. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3324/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. Pradeep Chaudhary, for the petitioner. Admit. Issue notice. In the meanwhile and until further orders, the respondents are directed to treat the petitioner as Constable (MT). (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3325/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. Pradeep Chaudhary, for the petitioner. Admit. Issue notice. In the meanwhile and until further orders, the respondents are directed to treat the petitioner as Constable (MT). (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3326/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. Pradeep Chaudhary, for the petitioner. Admit. Issue notice. In the meanwhile and until further orders, the respondents are directed to treat the petitioner as Constable (MT). (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3327/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. Pradeep Chaudhary, for the petitioner. Admit. Issue notice. In the meanwhile and until further orders, the respondents are directed to treat the petitioner as Constable (MT). (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3328/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. Pradeep Chaudhary, for the petitioner. Admit. Issue notice. In the meanwhile and until further orders, the respondents are directed to treat the petitioner as Constable (MT). (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3320/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. Pankaj Kumar Bohra, for the petitioner. Issue notice. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3315/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. L.D. Khatri, for the petitioner. Issue notice returnable within six weeks. Till next date, the operation and effect of the impugned order Annx.7 shall remain stayed. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3316/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. Sangeet Lodha, for the petitioner. Issue notice returnable within eight weeks. Meanwhile and till further orders, the effect and operation of the impugned Award Annx.1 shall remain stayed. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3335/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. R.S. Choudhary, for the petitioner. Issue notice returnable within three weeks and be given “Dasti” to the learned counsel for the petitioner. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1763/2007 Date of Order: May 30, 2007 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR, J. Mr. B.S. Sandhu, for the petitioners. By an application being IA No.1993/2007, the petitioners submit that