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.

Purkha Ram Chaba Vs. State and ors

Purkha Ram Chaba vs State and ors

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Jodhpur Decided Aug 29, 2014
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1163634

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
Right to Information

Case Summary

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

Right to Information

Key legal issue
Right to Information

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Purkha Ram Chaba

Advocate Dr. Nupur Bhati

Respondent

State and ors

Excerpt

.....singh and dr. nupur bhati, counsel for the petitioner, are shown in the cause list.2. heard the petitioner, who is present in person.3. the petitioner was working as junior technical assistant (jta) having been appointed since 21.05.2008 on contract basis. his contractual services have been discharged with effect from 30.06.2014 finding certain irregularities in the s.b. civil writ petition no.6073/2014. purkha ram chaba vs. state of rajasthan & ors. order dated 29/08/2014 2/3 work performed by him. the petitioner has filed a representation before the chief executive officer, zila parishad, nagaur, inter- alia, alleging that on the date of inspection i.e. on 01.07.2014, he was not the in-charge of the works undertaken in the gram panchayat- fidod and gwalu and, therefore, for the alleged wrong payments no liability could be fastened upon him and his contractual employment could not be discharged. however, the petitioner's representation has not been decided so far, therefore, the petitioner was constrained to file this writ petition in this court on 28.08.2014 after waiting for some period for decision of his representation.4. from the perusal of impugned order (annex.7) dated 01.07.2014 (page 42 of the paper book), it appears that the contractual term of such contractually employed persons was extended by the district collector-cum-coordinator of m-nrega scheme, nagaur, only upto 30.06.2014. the discharge of the contractual employment, therefore, prima-facie does not appear to be stigmatic. however, since the petitioner has already filed a representation to the c.e.o., zila parishad, nagaur, the said authority is expected to pass appropriate speaking order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner with regard to representation filed before it.4. the present writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with a liberty and direction to the petitioner to approach the said s.b. civil writ petition no.6073/2014. purkha ram chaba vs. state of rajasthan &.....

Full Judgment

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.6073/2014. Purkha Ram Chaba Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Order dated 29/08/2014 1/3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. :: ORDER

:: S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.6073/2014. Purkha Ram Chaba Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of Order ::::

29. h August, 2014. PRESENT HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Appearance: Mr. Purkha Ram Chaba, petitioner present-in-person. -- BY THE COURT:

1. The lawyers are observing strike which is contrary to various Supreme Court decisions. Names of Mr. Pawan Singh and Dr. Nupur Bhati, counsel for the petitioner, are shown in the cause list.

2. Heard the petitioner, who is present in person.

3. The petitioner was working as Junior Technical Assistant (JTA) having been appointed since 21.05.2008 on contract basis. His contractual services have been discharged with effect from 30.06.2014 finding certain irregularities in the S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.6073/2014. Purkha Ram Chaba Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Order dated 29/08/2014 2/3 work performed by him. The petitioner has filed a representation before the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Nagaur, inter- alia, alleging that on the date of inspection i.e. on 01.07.2014, he was not the in-charge of the works undertaken in the Gram Panchayat- Fidod and Gwalu and, therefore, for the alleged wrong payments no liability could be fastened upon him and his contractual employment could not be discharged. However, the petitioner's representation has not been decided so far, therefore, the petitioner was constrained to file this writ petition in this Court on 28.08.2014 after waiting for some period for decision of his representation.

4. From the perusal of impugned order (Annex.7) dated 01.07.2014 (Page 42 of the paper book), it appears that the contractual term of such contractually employed persons was extended by the District Collector-cum-Coordinator of M-NREGA Scheme, Nagaur, only upto 30.06.2014. The discharge of the contractual employment, therefore, prima-facie does not appear to be stigmatic. However, since the petitioner has already filed a representation to the C.E.O., Zila Parishad, Nagaur, the said authority is expected to pass appropriate speaking order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner with regard to representation filed before it.

4. The present writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with a liberty and direction to the petitioner to approach the said S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.6073/2014. Purkha Ram Chaba Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Order dated 29/08/2014 3/3 respondent No.5- Chief Executive Officer, Nagaur, and pursue his representation and the said authority is expected in law to decide the representation of the petitioner after giving him an opportunity of being heard, within a period of one month from today. The petitioner in the first instance may appear before the said authority on 08.09.2014. No costs. A coy of this order be sent to the concerned parties forthwith. (Dr. VINEET KOTHARI), J.

DJ/- S-9

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial