SBCWP NO.7306/02. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7306/2002. Smt.Indra Choudhary Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of order : February 18, 2009. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Hanuman Choudhary for the petitioner. Shri Zakir Hussain, Additional Government Counsel. Shri Prakash Thakuriya for respondent No.4. **** BY THE COURT :- This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order passed by the District Collector dated 27/9/2002. The District Collector by the aforesaid order, removed the petitioner from service and her selection made by the Gram Sabha of Gram Panchayat Rampur pursuant to the order dated 17/5/1999, was quashed. But, subsequently instead of appointing respondent No.4, petitioner was appointed. Respondent NO.4 approached this court by way of filing writ petition being SBCWP No.3762/2002 which was disposed of vide order dated 10/12/2003 with the direction to the Collector to decide his representation. SBCWP NO.7306/02. 2 2) Shri Hanuman Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that Collector has illegally held that petitioner was not the resident of village Rampur whereas, requirement of residence was relating to the Gram Panchayat within which the appointment was made. Village Behrampur-ka-bass was part of Gram Panchayat Rampur. Collector ignored this fact. It was argued that petitioner was more meritorious therefore she was appointed. Opportunity of hearing was not provided to the petitioner. 3) Shri Zakir Hussain, learned Additional Government Counsel and Shri Prakash Thakuriya, learned counsel for respondent No.4 have opposed the writ petition and argued that the District Collector heard not only respondent No.4 but also the petitioner. They in this connection invited attention of the court towards the pleadings in para 10 of the writ petition wherein, it has been stated that petitioner herself submitted reply to the notice issued by the Collector and justified appointment. In para 11, it has also been stated that hearing was provided to the rival parties. Learned counsel argued that District Collector in his order found that when selection of respondent No.4 was made by a unanimous decision in the Gram Sabha being resident of Village Rampur itself and was also possessing the qualification of B.Sc./B.Ed. besides being the member of Scheduled Caste, his selection could not be tinkered with by the Sarpanch on his own level. SBCWP NO.7306/02. 3 4) Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record, I find that the Collector has passed a comprehensive and considered order in which he held that the post in question ought to have been offered to respodnent No.4 because he was selected by the Gram Sabha held on 17/5/1999. Collector also found that respondent No.4 was fully qualified for appointment because besides member of Scheduled Castes, he has also qualification of B.Sc./B.Ed. The Select Committee was therefore was not valid in subsequently appointing the petitioner. 5) I do not find any error or infirmity in the order impugned passed by the District Collector Alwar dated 27/9/2002 so as to make interference therein. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil SBCWP NO.7306/02. 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL MISC.STAY APPLICATION NO.6876/2002. IN S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7306/2002. Smt.Indra Choudhary Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of order : February 18, 2009. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Hanuman Choudhary for the applicant-petitioner. Shri Zakir Hussain, Additional Government Counsel. Shri Prakash Thakuriya for respondent No.4. **** BY THE COURT :- Consequent upon dismissal of the writ petition, the stay application is rejected. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil