MOHANI BAI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.
LAWS(RAJ)-2014-11-266
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on November 21,2014

MOHANI BAI Appellant
VERSUS
State of Rajasthan And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA,J. - (1.) The petitioner, in the instant writ application, has prayed for the following relief(s): "(i) By issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction the respondent be directed to call for the record pertaining to the case of the petitioner. (ii) By issue an appropriate writ, order or direction the respondent be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for regularisation and her services be regularised w.e.f 1.4.1998. (iii) By issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction the salary from 1.5.1995 to 6.5.1995 be paid to the petitioner for which she is actually worked. (iv) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which the Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner. (v) Cost of the Writ Petition may kindly be granted in favour of the petitioner because the respondent has unnecessarily compelled the petitioner to file this writ petition. She should have been regularised by the respondent at their own end."
(2.) Shorn off unnecessary details, the indispensable skeletal material facts, necessary for appreciation of the controversy raised needs to be first noticed. It is pleaded case of the petitioner that she was appointed as Cook on 11th January, 1994 on a monthly salary of 600/-. The State-respondents framed a scheme for regularisation of part time Chowkidars/Cooks and submitted the same before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court taking note of the Scheme appended as Annexure- A to the list of dates, which were taken on record, observed that the Scheme was just and reasonable and disposed of the petitions substituting the High Court orders by an order directing regularisation as per Scheme. The Scheme submitted by the State-respondents contemplated for a District-wise Screening Committee for the purpose of phase-wise regularisation. The Constitution of the Committee reads thus: "(1) Joint Director of concerned Division Chairman (2) Assistant Director/Distt. Officer, Member Secretary, (3) Representative of Director, Social Welfare, Member."
(3.) Jobs and duties of the Screening Committee have specifically been spelled out in the Draft Action Plan/Scheme for regularisation. Since the case of the petitioner was considered for regularisation she has instituted the present writ proceedings.;


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