Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


GYAN DUTT PANDEY v STATE - CW Case No. 4405 of 1993 [2006] RD-RJ 1642 (2 August 2006)


Gyan Dutt Pandey V/s The State of Rajasthan & Ors. 2.8.2006


Mr.Mahendra Shah, for the petitioner.

Mr.S.N. Kumawat, for the respondents.

By the instant writ petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the orders dated 11.3.1993 and 28.5.1993 whereby appointment of the petitioner to the post of Principal, Shashtri & Upadhyay College and

Professor, Vyakaran Sanskrit Education has been cancelled and consequently, the petitioner has been dismissed from service.

The Rajasthan Public Service Commission has withdrawn the recommendation of selection of the petitioner for both the posts on the ground that in the application forms of the said posts, the petitioner has mentioned the date of birth as 1.7.1954 and further referred the name of father as Radha Krishan Pandey. On receiving the complaint, when the aforesaid fact was verified from the record by the concerned authority, it was revealed that the date of birth of the petitioner is 1.7.1951 and he has procured the appointment order by making the same 1.7.1954, otherwise he could not have been within the age limit for the post of Professor,

Vyakaran Sanskrit Education. On account of the aforesaid misleading and incorrect statement, the Commission has withdrawn the selection of not only the post of Professor, Vyakaran Sanskrit Education, but earlier selection also of Principal, Shashtri & Upadhyay College, after issuing notice to the petitioner and considering his explanation wherein he has no where disputed that he has mentioned his date of birth in both the application as 1.7.1954.

The submission of counsel for the petitioner is that since the petitioner has become member of both the services after his selection and appointment, therefore, unless a charge sheet is issued and enquiry is conducted as per Rajasthan Civil Services (CC & A) Rules, 1958, he could not have been dismissed from service.

The submission of counsel for the respondent is that the present case is not of any misconduct committed by the petitioner after having become the member of service, but the same relates to the eligibility which is within the domain of the RPSC.

I have considered the above mentioned submissions of the parties and is of the view that as regard eligibility is concerned, the RPSC is free to examine / re-examine the same even after appointment. In my opinion, no error has been committed by the RPSC while withdrawing the selections and further no error has been committed by the State Government while issuing the cancellation of appointment order, which cannot be said to be a misconduct after joining the service.

In view of above, the writ petition is dismissed without there being any order as to costs.

(P.S. ASOPA) J. ummed/-


Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.