- 1 - S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5776/2004 (Usha Jain vs. RSCDF & Ors.) DATE OF ORDER : 25/4/2008 HON'BLE JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr.T.Gupta, for the petitioner. Mr.Kuldeep Mathur, for the respondents. In this writ petition petitioner has prayed for direction to the respondents to produce all material and impugned orders/proceedings in regard to promotion given to respondent no.3 in pursuance of meeting dated 2/9/2003 and to produce all its subsequent papers/correspondence before this Court. Further it is prayed that effect and operation of impugned orders/proceedings taken place in pursuance of meeting dt:2/9/2003 and order dated 15/3/2004 and 20/3/2004 qua respondent no.3 may kindly be quashed and set aside and promotion orders passed in favour of respondent no.3 may also be set aside. Further it is prayed that petitioner may also be ordered to be promoted on the post of Deputy Manager (Plant) w.e.f.29/1/1998 i.e. the date when his junior has been promoted. Upon perusal of writ petition, it is revealed that order impugned by the petitioner with regard to promotion of respondent no.3 is not produced before this Court so also upon - 2 - perusal of grounds it is no where stated that which rule has been violated by the respondents so also it is no where stated that which rules are applicable for regulating the service conditions of the employees of respondent no.2 but only assertion made in the writ petition is that petitioner is facing great humiliation and in spite of much senior from respondent no.3 she is being called junior to respondent no.3. Further it is stated that respondent's action is illegal, arbitrary and unnecessary harassment to the petitioner which amounts to violation of fundamental rights of the petitioner. After issuing notice, respondents have produced on record Annex.R-2/7 along with the proceedings of establishment committee by which the case of respondent no.3 was considered for promotion w.e.f 29/1/1998 and petitioner's case was not considered for promotion. A pointed query is made from learned counsel for the petitioner that how Annex.R-2/7 is illegal and in violation of any Rules and whether it is stated in the writ petition that the said meeting of the establishment committee is bad in view of particular rule or regulation. Learned counsel for the petitioner failed to point out any ground that under which provision the meeting of establishment committee is illegal. Learned counsel for the petitioner also failed to point out under which provision of Rules the service conditions of petitioner and respondent no.3 - 3 - are governed so also he failed to point out any provision of law with regard to challenge to promotion of respondent no.3 w.e.f. 29/1/1998. In absence of producing any rule or regulation so also any pleadings in this behalf in the writ petition, it is not possible for this Court give any finding with regard to validity of Annex.R- 2/7, therefore, this writ petition is totally misconceived and deserves to be dismissed. After dictating above order in the Court, learned counsel for the petitioner Shri T.Gupta submitted that service conditions of the petitioner are governed under Rajasthan Cooperative Dairy Federation Employees (Supervisory Staff) Condition of Recruitment and Promotion, Regulation, 1980 but upon perusal of writ petition, there is no ground with regard to any provision of the said Regulation, which is alleged to be violated by the respondents at the time of considering the promotion of respondent no.3 w.e.f. 29/1/1998, therefore, in absence of any ground of violation of the Rules and Regulation no relief prayed for can be granted. Upon perusal of ground Nos. A to F of the writ petition, it is obvious that there is no mention with regard to violation of any Rules. In view of the above, this writ petition is dismissed. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J.