Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

DR(MRS)RATNA SAXENA versus RAJ.NON

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


DR(MRS)RATNA SAXENA v RAJ.NON-GOVT.EDUCATIONAL INST - CW Case No. 2360 of 1997 [2007] RD-RJ 961 (20 February 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR

ORDER

SB CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2360/1997

Dr. (Mrs.) Ratna Saxena V/s The Rajasthan Non-

Government Educational Institutionals Tribunal,

Jaipur & Ors.

DATE OF ORDER ::: 20.2.2007

PRESENT

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PREM SHANKER ASOPA

Mr.R.D. Rastogi, for the petitioner.

Mr.Vijay Singh for the respondent No.2.

Mr.Amod Kasliwal, for the respondent No.4.

Heard counsel for the parties.

This writ petition is directed against the order dated 31.3.1997 of the Rajasthan Non-Government

Educational Institutions Tribunal, Jaipur (in short

"the Tribunal") whereby the appeal filed by the respondent No.4 has been allowed and she has been held to be entitled for appointment against the vacancy created on account of retirement of Smt.

Jaya Devi from the post of Lecturer (Zoology).

Against the said order passed by the Tribunal, the college has filed SB Civil Writ Petition

No.2766/1997, which was dismissed on 8.4.1999. DB

Civil Special Appeal No.474/1999 was filed against the order dated 8.4.1999, which was also dismissed on 10.7.2006 and the respondent No.4 was allowed to continue. It is stated at bar that now the respondent No.4 has retired and further been paid all her dues. In the changed circumstances, the petitioner Dr.(Mrs.) Ratna Saxena, who was appointed as Lecturer (Zoology) vide order dated 6.9.1996, was also constrained to challenge the said order of the

Tribunal whereby the respondent No.4 has been held to be eligible and entitled for appointment. Now the petitioner is only aggrieved by the operative part of the order of the Tribunal, which declared the appointment of petitioner - Dr.Ratna Saxena illegal and void.

Counsel for the College Shri Vijay Singh frankly submits that after retirement of respondent No.4, there is no legal impediment in continuing the petitioner as Lecturer (Zoology). Counsel for the petitioner also submits that she has already been confirmed in the meanwhile.

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the operative part of the order dated 31.3.1997 of the

Tribunal whereby appointment of the petitioner has been declared illegal and void, does not survive and the same will not adversely effect the petitioner.

The writ petition is disposed of.

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


Copyright

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

Advertisement

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 |

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