Hardeo Singh Vs. State of Raj

Hardeo Singh vs State of Raj

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Jodhpur Decided Jul 03, 2014

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1154077

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/1154077
Court: Rajasthan Jodhpur High Court
Decided On: Jul 03, 2014
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Hardeo Singh

Respondent

State of Raj

Excerpt

.....for the petitioner/s. none present for the respondents. -- by the court: 1. the petitioners having been appointed as lab technician/s were assigned the work of 'maleria technician/s' and, therefore, they have claimed parity of pay with them. the respondents have filed reply to the writ petition controverting the submissions made in the writ petition. s.b.civil writ petition no.1398/1998 hardeo singh versus state of rajasthan & ors.& s.b.civil writ petition no.1864/1996 prabhu dayal versus state of rajasthan & ors.order dt: 03/07/2014 2/2 2. having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.this court is of the opinion that the case involves disputed questions of facts, which are firstly required to be determined by the competent authority of the respondent, medical & health department, namely, the director, who has been arrayed as the sole respondent in the present writ petition. 3. accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of with a liberty and direction to the petitioners to firs.approach the respondent- director of the medical and health department, jaipur, with appropriate representation giving the details of the work undertaken by them and the relevant evidence and the respondent, director, medical & health department, is expected to decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners expeditiously, preferably witin a period of six months from today. no costs. a copy of this order be sent to the concerned parties forthwith. (dr. vineet kothari).j. dj/- h-4 & 5

Full Judgment

S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.1398/1998 Hardeo Singh versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.& S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.1864/1996 Prabhu Dayal versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.Order dt: 03/07/2014 1/2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR ORDER

(1) S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.1398/1998 Hardeo Singh versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.& (2) S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.1864/1996 Prabhu Dayal versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.Date of Order ::: 03rd July, 2014 PRESENT HON'BLE Dr.

JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Appearance: Mr.Anil Bhandari ].Mr.V.D.Dadhich ].- for the petitioner/s.

None present for the respondents.

-- BY THE COURT: 1.

The petitioners having been appointed as Lab Technician/s were assigned the work of 'Maleria Technician/s' and, therefore, they have claimed parity of pay with them.

The respondents have filed reply to the writ petition controverting the submissions made in the writ petition.

S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.1398/1998 Hardeo Singh versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.& S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.1864/1996 Prabhu Dayal versus State of Rajasthan & ORS.Order dt: 03/07/2014 2/2 2.

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioneRs.this Court is of the opinion that the case involves disputed questions of facts, which are firstly required to be determined by the competent authority of the respondent, Medical & Health Department, namely, the Director, who has been arrayed as the sole respondent in the present writ petition.

Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of with a liberty and direction to the petitioners to fiRs.approach the respondent- Director of the Medical and Health Department, Jaipur, with appropriate representation giving the details of the work undertaken by them and the relevant evidence and the respondent, Director, Medical & Health Department, is expected to decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners expeditiously, preferably witin a period of six months from today.

No costs.

A copy of this order be sent to the concerned parties forthwith.

(Dr.

VINEET KOTHARI).J.

DJ/- H-4 & 5

Same Court & Year Rajasthan Jodhpur · 2014 Same Parties Hardeo Singh vs State of Raj Same Subject Criminal