Satyanarayan Verma Vs. State and ors

Satyanarayan Verma vs State and ors

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Jodhpur Decided Oct 22, 2013

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1095649

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1095649
Court: Rajasthan Jodhpur High Court
Decided On: Oct 22, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Satyanarayan Verma

Respondent

State and ors

Excerpt

.....the post of nayab tehsildar and tehsildar for the quota of promotees. in the said writ petition, on 12.03.2012, it was submitted by the learned addl. advocate general on instructions that though the review dpc could not be held in the concerning years because of intervening factors including interim orders passed by this court, which were later on modified but, ultimately the review dpc was held and the petitioner had been promoted to the post of nayab tehsildar. in view of the submission so made, the petition was considered infructuous and was dismissed as such. however, it was left open for the petitioner to file afresh in case any grievance remaining yet. sb civil misc. application no.64/2013 2 the petitioner has filed this miscellaneous petition with the submissions that the statement as made on 12.03.2012 was not of correct state of affairs and he had not been promoted to the post of nayab tehsildar. the prayer has, therefore, been made in this petition to recall the order dated 12.03.2012. on being noticed in this application, it has been pointed out by the learned addl. advocate general that not only to the post of nayab tehsildar, the petitioner has thereafter been promoted even to the post of tehsildar by the order dated 20.09.2013; and has been posted as such by the order dated 25.09.2013. copies of these orders have been placed before the court for perusal. in view of the submissions so made, there appears no reason to continue with this miscellaneous application any further. it is also noticed that even while dismissing the petition as infructuous it was left open for the petitioner to file afresh in case of any grievance remaining yet. while reiterating the order aforesaid it is made clear that in case of any grievance remaining yet or arising in future, it would be open for the petitioner to file a petition afresh. subject to the observations foregoing, this application stands rejected. (dinesh maheshwari),j. cpgoyal//-

Full Judgment

SB Civil Misc.

Application No.64/2013 1 11 S.B.Civil Misc.

Application No.64/2013 Satyanarayan Verma versus State of Raj.

& ORS.In S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3639/2007 DATE OF ORDER

: 22nd October 2013.

HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI Mr.M.R.Choudhary, for the applicant.

Mr.G.R.Punia, Sr.Advocate & AAG with Mr.H.S.Bishnoi, for the respondent-State.

<><><> BY THE COURT: The petitioner who had been working on the post of Inspector (Land Records) filed a writ petition (CWP No.3639/2007) stating the grievance against denial of promotion and the failure on the part of the respondents to fill up the back log vacancies for the post of Nayab Tehsildar and Tehsildar for the quota of promotees.

In the said writ petition, on 12.03.2012, it was submitted by the learned Addl.

Advocate General on instructions that though the review DPC could not be held in the concerning years because of intervening factors including interim orders passed by this Court, which were later on modified but, ultimately the review DPC was held and the petitioner had been promoted to the post of Nayab Tehsildar.

In view of the submission so made, the petition was considered infructuous and was dismissed as such.

However, it was left open for the petitioner to file afresh in case any grievance remaining yet.

SB Civil Misc.

Application No.64/2013 2 The petitioner has filed this Miscellaneous Petition with the submissions that the statement as made on 12.03.2012 was not of correct state of affairs and he had not been promoted to the post of Nayab Tehsildar.

The prayer has, therefore, been made in this petition to recall the order dated 12.03.2012.

On being noticed in this application, it has been pointed out by the learned Addl.

Advocate General that not only to the post of Nayab Tehsildar, the petitioner has thereafter been promoted even to the post of Tehsildar by the order dated 20.09.2013; and has been posted as such by the order dated 25.09.2013.

Copies of these orders have been placed before the Court for perusal.

In view of the submissions so made, there appears no reason to continue with this Miscellaneous Application any further.

It is also noticed that even while dismissing the petition as infructuous it was left open for the petitioner to file afresh in case of any grievance remaining yet.

While reiterating the order aforesaid it is made clear that in case of any grievance remaining yet or arising in future, it would be open for the petitioner to file a petition afresh.

Subject to the observations foregoing, this application stands rejected.

(DINESH MAHESHWARI),J.

cpgoyal//-

Same Court & Year Rajasthan Jodhpur · 2013 Same Parties Satyanarayan Verma vs State and ors Same Subject Education