Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

State of Raj. and ors Vs. Rama Ram

State of Raj. and ors vs Rama Ram

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Jodhpur Decided Jul 30, 2014
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1160412

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Rajasthan Jodhpur High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

State of Raj. and ors

Respondent

Rama Ram

Excerpt

.....of case mr.rama ram - respondent present in person ..by the court : this matter came up for orders on an application seeking condonation of delay of 720 days in filing appeal to challenge order dated 09.2.2012 passed by learned single bench. the factual background necessary to be noticed is that the respondent-petitioner is working as a cook at police station, chohtan, district barmer since february, 1989. the appellant- respondent allowed regular status in service to one other cook, namely, shri jai ram but the same benefit was not extended to the respondent-petitioner. the learned single bench, by arriving at the conclusion that no discrimination could have been made by the employer among similarly situated persons directed the employer to regular the respondent-petitioner in service in the terms applied for jai ram, the similarly situated person. [2].to explain delay in filing the appeal, it is submitted that some time was consumed in administrative sanction and, therefore, the delay occurred. from perusal of the contents made in the application preferred as per provisions of section 5 of the limitation act, it appears that certified copy of order dated 9.2.2012 was received by the appellants on 14.2.2012 and that was sent to the competent authority. no sufficient reason is given to satisfy further the delay occurred in filing the appeal. as a matter of fact, the application lacks narration of details causing delay in filing the appeal. the contents of the application reads as under :- “2. that it is respectfully submitted that after receipt of the certified copy of the order, opinion was sent by the learned addl. government counsel and after receipt of the opinion the matter was sent by the officer incharge to the police headquarters and wherefrom the matter was sent to the state government for taking appropriate decision. 3. that it is respectfully submitted that the matter was carefully examined and considered by the state government at various levels.....

Full Judgment

[1].IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR ORDER

D.B.CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (W) NO.805/2014 State of Rajasthan & ORS.versus Rama Ram Date of Order :: 30.7.2014 PRESENT HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE ATUL KUMAR JAIN Mr.K.S.Bhati, SHO, P.S.Chohtan, District Barmer Officer Incharge of case Mr.Rama Ram - respondent present in person ..BY THE COURT : This matter came up for orders on an application seeking condonation of delay of 720 days in filing appeal to challenge order dated 09.2.2012 passed by learned Single Bench.

The factual background necessary to be noticed is that the respondent-petitioner is working as a Cook at Police Station, Chohtan, District Barmer since February, 1989.

The appellant- respondent allowed regular status in service to one other Cook, namely, Shri Jai Ram but the same benefit was not extended to the respondent-petitioner.

The learned Single Bench, by arriving at the conclusion that no discrimination could have been made by the employer among similarly situated persons directed the employer to regular the respondent-petitioner in service in the terms applied for Jai Ram, the similarly situated person.

[2].To explain delay in filing the appeal, it is submitted that some time was consumed in administrative sanction and, therefore, the delay occurred.

From perusal of the contents made in the application preferred as per provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, it appears that certified copy of order dated 9.2.2012 was received by the appellants on 14.2.2012 and that was sent to the competent authority.

No sufficient reason is given to satisfy further the delay occurred in filing the appeal.

As a matter of fact, the application lacks narration of details causing delay in filing the appeal.

The contents of the application reads as under :- “2.

That it is respectfully submitted that after receipt of the certified copy of the order, opinion was sent by the learned Addl.

Government Counsel and after receipt of the opinion the matter was sent by the Officer Incharge to the Police Headquarters and wherefrom the matter was sent to the State Government for taking appropriate decision.

3.

That it is respectfully submitted that the matter was carefully examined and considered by the State Government at various levels and thereafter the file was sent to the Law Department, Govt.

of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

The Law Department examined the matter thoroughly in the light of the judgment rendered in the case of State of Rajasthan versus Daya Lal, reported in (2011) 2 SCC429and also found that the present case is distinguishable to the case of Jai Ram on the basis fo which the present writ petition has been decided and accordingly, issued sanction for filing a special appeal against he judgment dated 09.02.2012.

The file was sent back to the [3].Home Department, Govt.

of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

The Home (Gr.1) Department, Govt.

of Rajasthan on its turn vide letter dated 20.03.2014 sent the mater to the Inspector General of Police (HQ).Rajasthan, Jaipur and instructed to file the special appeal against the

JUDGMENT / ORDER

dated 09.02.2012 and to appoint Officer Incharge.

4.

That thereafter Officer Incharge in the matter was appointed and the file was sent to him with the direction to contract the learned Govt.

Counsel and to prepare and file the special appeal.

5.

That it is respectfully submitted that thereafter the record of the case was collected by the Officer Incharge and a contract was made to the learned Addl.

Govt.

Counsel (Shri Anil Kumar Bissa).The mater was discussed with him and special appeal has been prepared by him and the same is filed today without any further delay.”

.

The facts given disclose huge gaps in the actions taken and no reason is given for such interval.

We are of the considered opinion that the respondents are having no justifiable reason to get the delay in filing the appeal condoned.

Accordingly, the application is dismissed.

In the result, the appeal too is dismissed.

[ATUL KUMAR JAIN]., J.

[GOVIND MATHUR]., J.

Sanjay

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial