SBCWP No.5542/2010- Raghuvir Jevriya v. State & ors Order dt:26.07.2010 1 of 2 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5542/2010 Raghuvir Jevriya v. State of Rajasthan & ors Date of Order: 26th July 2010 HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr. A.R. Godara, for the petitioner By the impugned order the services of the petitioner, who was working as Gram Sahayak under NAREGA in Zila Parishad, Nagaur; has been terminated as he failed to secure minimum evaluation marks on the basis of work performed on the post and the petitioner's marks earlier awarded for the year 2009-10 as 60, were found to be incorrect due to computer mistake and actual marks obtained by him were found to be only 43, whereas contracts of persons who secured evaluation marks 60 and above were renewed and their service were continued by the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no basis of change in the marks has been disclosed to the petitioner and this is being done just to adjust some other person who is close to concerned Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat. However, having heard the learned counsel, since all these averments of mala fide have not been made in the writ petition, SBCWP No.5542/2010- Raghuvir Jevriya v. State & ors Order dt:26.07.2010 2 of 2 specifically impleading said Sarpanch as respondent, this Court can not go into these questions at this stage. It is not known as to how and who made change of evaluation marks from 60 to 43 and in Annx.6 it is only mentioned that the same happened due to mistake of computer. In the facts & circumstances of the case, it is expedient to issue direction to the petitioner to approach the concerned authority by way of representation and said authority is expected to decide the same by a speaking order, showing application of mind to the relevant facts and the contentions raised by the petitioner before him; within four weeks from submitting of such representation by the petitioner along with a certified copy of this order. It is only after decision on such representation by the concerned authority that the petitioner will be free to avail legal remedy, if he feel aggrieved therewith, in accordance with law. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. [DR. VINEET KOTHATRI],J. Item No.157 mma