Item No. 17. DJ/- SBCWP NO. 7122/2010 Jena Ram Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. Order dt:02nd August 2010 1/2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7122/2010 Jena Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. DATE OF ORDER ::: 02nd August 2010 P R E S E N T HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr. V.R. Choudhary, for the petitioner. --- 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. By the impugned order dated 05.04.2010 (Annex-4) the candidature of the petitioner for appointment on the post of Prabodhak has been rejected by the competent authority after consideration by a Committee on the ground that experience certificate issued by the competent authority i.e. Block Elementary Education Officer, Aahore, Jalore Annex-3 was not counter signed by the competent authority. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after the said order was served upon the petitioner, he has already sent a notice for demand of justice vide Annex-5 dated 02.06.2010 and another representation to District Education Officer, Elementary Item No. 17. DJ/- SBCWP NO. 7122/2010 Jena Ram Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. Order dt:02nd August 2010 2/2 Education, Jalore vide representation dated 13.07.2010 Annex-6, while placing reliance on the judgments of this Court wherein it was held that counter signature of the District Education Officer was not necessary for the purpose of taking into consideration the experience certificate issued by the Block Elementary Education Officer, as has been done in the present case. 4. The impugned order dated 05.04.2010 does not deal with the relevant facts and judgments of this Court and even though the title of the order 'Speaking Order' is not really a speaking order, as it does not touch upon the relevant facts and legal position. 5. Consequently, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents to decide representation dated 13.07.2010 and notice for demand of justice dated 02.06.2010 expeditiously, preferably within two weeks from supply of certified copy of this order. It is also made clear that if the concerned authority passes the order again in a cryptic manner, this Court may take a serious view of the same and impose exemplary cost upon the concerned authority. (DR. VINEET KOTHARI), J. DJ/- 17