JAGDISH PRASAD SHARMA Vs. RAJASTHAN STATE SOCIAL WELFARE ADVISORY BOARD
LAWS(RAJ)-1993-8-88
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on August 18,1993

JAGDISH PRASAD SHARMA Appellant
VERSUS
Rajasthan State Social Welfare Advisory Board Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Milap Chandra Jain, J. - (1.) This revision petition has been filed under Section 115, Civil Procedure Code against the order of the learned District Judge, Bikaner dated July 28, 1993 by which he has allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the learned Munsif, Bikaner dated July 22, 1993, directing the defendant- respondents No. 1 and 2 to allow the petitioner-plaintiff Jagdish Prasad to continue to work at Bikaner and defendant-respondent Radhey Shyam to work at Balotra. The facts of the case giving rise to this revision petition may be summarised thus.
(2.) The plaintiff Jagdish Prasad and defendant Radhey Shyam are in the service of the Government of Rajasthan as Junior Accountants. The plaintiff Jagdish Prasad is posted in Social Welfare Department, Pungal, Bikaner for over five years and the defendant Radhey Shyam is posted at Balotra for over 21/2 years. By order dated May 21, 1993, their postings were exchanged. Thereon the plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction and moved an application for temporary injunction. All the these defendants filed their replies seriously opposing the application for temporary injunction. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the learned Munsif allowed the application by its order dated July 22, 1993 and on appeal it was set aside by the learned District Judge as said above.
(3.) It has been contended by the learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner that the learned District Judge has acted with material irregularity and illegality in exercise of his jurisdiction in allowing the appeals of the defendants and setting aside the said order of the learned Munsif. He contended that the learned District Judge did not consider all the material on record and the record perused was not properly considered. He also did not consider that the defendant Radhey Shyam was not a fit person and three departmental enquiries are pending against him. He further contended that the defendant Radhey Shyam was transferred to Bikaner on his own request on the ground that his daughter is a cancer patient, she required treatment either at Jaipur or Bikaner and he has been granted Rs. 2 lacs for this purpose and in fact his daughter is servicing as a teacher at Balotra and she would be taken to Bombay for her treatment. He lastly contended that it is well proved from the material on record that the said transfer order was passed simply to accommodate the defendant Radhey Shyam at Bikaner.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.