CW 9067/06 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9067/06 Dr. Lata Rajoria & Ors. Versus State & Anr. DATE OF ORDER : 27/05/2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mr. Rajendra Soni, for petitioners Mr. M.S. Raghav, AAG Mr. B.K. Sharma, Dy.G.A. Mr. Anand Sharma, for applicant *** Government Counsel on 2nd April, 2007 informed this court that petitioners were also considered under the interim order of this court dated 21st November, 2006, but their result has been kept in sealed cover and others who were considered they have been promoted. But, it appears that the State Government later on filed application for recalling of the said order on the premise that fact referred to was not correct infact no DPC was convened. As such, no promotions have been made. At this point of time this court directed to the Government Counsel to file affidavit as to on whose instructions statement was made before this court on 2nd April, 2007. Counsel appearing in the matter has filed affidavit pointing out that verbal statement was made by the Officer Incharge and on whose instructions this has been recorded in the order of 2nd April, 2007. This court, thereafter, directed on 16th April, 2008 to file explanation of OIC. Affidavit has now been filed by OIC as well and submits that he has not instructed to the Counsel appearing for the State to make such statement which has been recorded by this court. CW 9067/06 [2] Thus, either of one is certainly at fault. Both the statements which are recorded in the respective affidavits are contrary to each other. Lawyers being officers of the court are always expected to be responsible before making any statement and it is always advisable to be careful and if such things are happened in future, the Court will take stern action against the defaulting person, however, unconditional apology has been furnished to this court by the counsel. In such circumstances, this court is not inclined to proceed further in the matter and considers it appropriate to allow the application filed for recalling of the order dated 2nd April, 2007. The same stands recalled. Application filed by the State stands allowed. Counsel for petitioner on instructions submits that at later point of time they have also been recommended by DPC, but promotion order has not been issued so far in view of interim order dated 21st November, 2006 passed by this court. State Government filed application placing on record the order dated 9th May, 2008 Ann.RA-1 to show that promotions have been made on the recommendation of DPC for the post of Professor [Gynaecology & Obstertics] and further request has been made that they may be permitted to make further promotions as per recommendations of DPC from reserved category candidates against the available vacancies of Professor for the year 2008-09. CW 9067/06 [3] In the light of request made by the State Government seeking permission from this court making further promotions on the recommendations of DPC referred to supra, Counsel for petitioner does not want to press this petition with liberty to assail if any prejudice is caused to them. Liberty granted. Consequently, the writ petition stands dismissed as not pressed. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. FRBOHRA9067CW2006 27-5.doc