(Uday Umesh Lalit and Vineet Saran, JJ.)
Review Petition (Civil) No. of 2020 (Arising out of D. No. 13152 of 2020) In Writ Petition (Civil) No. 936 of 2018, decided on July 21, 2020
Dinesh Kumar Gupta ______________________________ Petitioner;
v.
Hon’ble High Court for Judicature of Rajasthan _________ Respondent.
With
Review Petition (Civil) No. of 2020
(Arising out of D. No. 12402 of 2020)
In
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 897 of 2019
Anil Kaushik
Versus
Rajasthan High Court
With
Review Petition (Civil)D. No. 11770 of 2020
In
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1471 of 2018
Rajasthan Judicial Service Officers Association
Versus
Rajasthan High Court
With
Review Petition (Civil) No. of 2020
(Arising out of D. No. 11925 of 2020)
In
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 464 of 2019
Ajay Singh
Versus
High Court of Judicature of Rajasthan at Jodhpur
With
Review Petition (Civil) No. of 2020
(Arising out of D. No. 12403 of 2020)
In
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 899 of 2019
Rameshwar Dayal Rohilla
Versus
Rajasthan High Court
With
Review Petition (Civil) No. of 2020
(Arising out of D. No. 13292 of 2020)
In
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 498 of 2019
Puran Kumar Sharma
Versus
State of Rajasthan
With
Review Petition (Civil) No. of 2020
(Arising out of D. NO. 13327 of 2020)
In
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 610 of 2020
Mukesh
Versus
Hon’ble High Court for Judicature at Rajasthan
And
Review Petition (Civil) No. of 2020
(Arising out of D. No. 15155 of 2020)
In
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 967 of 2018
Ajay Sharma and Others
Versus
Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur and Others
Review Petition (Civil) No. of 2020 (Arising out of D. No. 13152 of 2020); Writ Petition (Civil) No. 936 of 2018; Review Petition (Civil) No. of 2020 (Arising out of D. No. 12402 of 2020); Writ Petition (Civil) No. 897 of 2019; Review Petition (Civil) D. No. 11770 of 2020; Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1471 of 2018; Review Petition (Civil) No. of 2020 (Arising out of D. No. 11925 of 2020); Writ Petition (Civil) No. 464 of 2019; Review Petition (Civil) No. of 2020 (Arising out of D. No. 12403 of 2020); Writ Petition (Civil) No. 899 of 2019; Review Petition (Civil) No. of 2020 (Arising out of D. No. 13292 of 2020); Writ Petition (Civil) No. 498 of 2019; Review Petition (Civil) No. of 2020 (Arising out of D. NO. 13327 of 2020); Writ Petition (Civil) No. 610 of 2020; And; Review Petition (Civil) No. of 2020 (Arising out of D. No. 15155 of 2020); and Writ Petition (Civil) No. 967 of 2018
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1) REVIEW PETITION (CIVIL) No.______OF 2020 (@ D. NO. 13152 OF 2020)IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 936 of 2018
1. Application seeking permission for oral hearing of Review Petition is rejected.
2. Delay in preferring Review Petition is condoned.
3. This Petition has been filed by two of the original petitioners in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 936 of 2018.
4. All the submissions advanced in said Writ Petition and connected matters were dealt with in detail by this Court in its Judgment dated 29.04.2020.
5. We have gone through the Review Petition and do not find any error apparent on record to justify interference in the Review Jurisdiction.
6. This Review Petition is dismissed.
2) REVIEW PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2020 (@ OF D. NO. 12402 OF 2020) IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 897 OF 2019.
7. Delay in preferring Review Petition is condoned.
8. This Review Petition is preferred by the Petitioners in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 897 of 2019 who were seeking benefit of ad hoc officiating service put in by promotees as Fast Track Court Judges. The issue was considered in detail by this Court in its Judgment dated 29.04.2020.
9. We have gone through the Review Petition and do not find any substance in the submissions raised in the petition.
10. This Review Petition is dismissed.
3) REVIEW PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2020 (@ OF D. NO. 11770 OF 2020) IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 1471 OF 2018.
11. Application for advancing oral arguments is rejected.
12. This Review Petition is filed by the Association. The submissions raised on behalf of the Association were dealt with in detail by this Court in its Judgment dated 29.04.2020.
13. The grounds taken in the Review Petition do not make out any error apparent on record to call for interference in Review Jurisdiction.
14. This Review Petition is dismissed.
4) REVIEW PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2020(@ D. NO. 11925 OF 2020)IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 464 OF 2019
15. Delay in preferring Review Petition is condoned.
16. This Review Petition is preferred by the Petitioners in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 464 of 2019, which sought benefit of ad hoc/officiating service put in by promotees as Fast Track Court Judges. All the submissions in that behalf were dealt with in detail by this Court in its Judgment dated 29.04.2020.
17. We have gone through the contents of the Review Petition and do not find any error apparent on record to justify interference in Review Jurisdiction.
18. This Review Petition is dismissed.
5) REVIEW PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2020(@ D. NO. 12403 OF 2020)IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 899 OF 2019
19. Delay in preferring Review Petition is condoned.
20. This Review Petition is preferred by the Petitioners in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 899 of 2019, which sought benefit of ad hoc/officiating service put in by promotees who were promoted as Fast Track Court Judges. All the submissions in that behalf were dealt with in detail by this Court in its Judgment dated 29.04.2020.
21. We have gone through the contents of the Review Petition and do not find any error apparent on record to justify interference in Review Jurisdiction.
22. This Review Petition is dismissed.
6) REVIEW PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2020(@ D. NO. 13292 OF 2020)IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 498 OF 2019
23. Application for oral hearing is rejected.
24. Delay in preferring Review Petition is condoned.
25. This Review Petition is filed by some of the petitioners in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 498 of 2019, who were successful in LCE.
26. Though the basic submissions based on applicability of Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010, was not accepted, a limited relief was given in conclusion (a) in para 44.
27. We have gone through the contents of the Review Petition and do not find any error apparent on record to justify to take a different view in the matter.
28. This Review Petition is, therefore, dismissed.
7) REVIEW PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2020(@ D. NO. 13327 OF 2020) IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 610 OF 2020 (@ D. NO. 13252 OF 2019)
29. Application for oral hearing of Review Petition is rejected.
30. Delay in preferring Review Petition is condoned.
31. This Review Petition is filed by some of the petitioners in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 610 of 2020 (@ D. NO. 13252 OF 2019), who were successful in LCE.
32. Though the basic submissions based on applicability of Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010, was not accepted, a limited relief was given in conclusion (a) in para 44.
33. We have gone through the contents of the Review Petition and do not find any error apparent on record to justify to take a different view in the matter.
34. This Review Petition is, therefore, dismissed.
8) REVIEW PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2020(@ D. NO. 15155 OF 2020)IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 967 OF 2018
35. Application seeking permission for oral hearing of Review Petition is rejected.
36. Delay in preferring Review Petition is condoned.
37. This Petition is filed by some of the Petitioners from Writ Petition (Civil) No. 967 of 2018 i.e., Direct Recruits submitting that the appointments made after Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010 ought to be in accordance with the cyclic orders. All the relevant submissions in that behalf were dealt with in detail by this Court in its Judgment dated 29.04.2020.
38. We have gone through the contents of the Review Petition and do not find any error apparent on record to justify to take a different view in the matter.
39. This Review Petition is, therefore, dismissed.
REVIEW PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 13152/2020
Dinesh Kumar Gupta ______________________________ Petitioner
v.
The Honble High Court for Judicature of Rajasthan _______ Respondent
(IA No. 56213/2020 – FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING REVIEW PETITION; IA No. 56221/2020 – FOR EX-PARTE STAY; IA No. 56224/2020 – FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT; IA No. 56218/2020 – FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.; IA No. 56215/2020 – FOR ORAL HEARING; and, IA No. 56216/2020 – FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)
WITH
Diary No. 12402/2020 (X)
(IA No. 63128/2020 – FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT;IA No. 52765/2020 – FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT; IA No. 52760/2020 – FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT; and, IA No. 63126/2020 – FOR ORAL HEARING)
Diary No. 11770/2020 (X)
(IA No. 49629/2020 – FOR ORAL HEARING)
Diary No. 11925/2020 (X)
(IA No. 50687/2020 – FOR STAY)
Diary No. 12403/2020 (X)
(IA No. 63131/2020 – FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT; IA No. 52759/2020 – FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT; IA No. 52757/2020 – FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT; and, IA No. 63130/2020 – FOR ORAL HEARING)
Diary No. 13292/2020 (X)
(IA No. 56911/2020 – FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING REVIEW PETITION; and, IA No. 56910/2020 – FOR ORAL HEARING)
Diary No. 13327/2020 (X)
(IA No. 57145/2020 – FOR EX-PARTE STAY; and, IA No. 57139/2020 – FOR ORAL HEARING)
Diary No. 15155/2020 (X)
Date: 21-07-2020 These matters were circulated today.
(Before Uday Umesh Lalit and Vineet Saran, JJ.)
By Circulation
UPON perusing papers the Court made the following
ORDER
REVIEW PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No. 13152/2020
(IA No. 56213/2020 – FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING REVIEW PETITION; IA No. 56221/2020 – FOR EX-PARTE STAY; IA No. 56224/2020 – FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT; IA No. 56218/2020 – FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.; IA No. 56215/2020 – FOR ORAL HEARING; and, IA No. 56216/2020 – FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)
40. Application seeking permission for oral hearing of Review Petition is rejected.
41. Delay condoned.
42. The Review Petition is dismissed, in terms of the Signed Order.
43. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
Diary No. 12402/2020 (X)
(IA No. 63128/2020 – FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT;IA No. 52765/2020 – FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT; IA No. 52760/2020 – FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT; and, IA No. 63126/2020 – FOR ORAL HEARING)
44. Application seeking permission for oral hearing of Review Petition is rejected.
45. Delay in preferring Review Petition is condoned.
46. The Review Petition is dismissed, in terms of the Signed Order.
47. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
Diary No. 11770/2020 (X)
(IA No. 49629/2020 – FOR ORAL HEARING)
48. Application for advancing oral arguments is rejected.
49. The Review Petition is dismissed, in terms of the Signed Order.
50. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
Diary No. 11925/2020 (X)
(IA No. 50687/2020 – FOR STAY)
51. Delay in preferring Review Petition is condoned.
52. The Review Petition is dismissed, in terms of the Signed Order.
53. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
Diary No. 12403/2020 (X)
(IA No. 63131/2020 – FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT; IA No. 52759/2020 – FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT; IA No. 52757/2020 – FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT; and, IA No. 63130/2020 – FOR ORAL HEARING)
54. Application for advancing oral arguments is rejected.
55. Delay condoned.
56. The Review Petition is dismissed, in terms of the Signed Order.
57. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
Diary No. 13292/2020 (X)
(IA No. 56911/2020 – FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING REVIEW PETITION; and, IA No. 56910/2020 – FOR ORAL HEARING)
58. Application for oral hearing is rejected.
59. Delay condoned.
60. The Review Petition is dismissed, in terms of the Signed Order.
61. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
Diary No. 13327/2020 (X)
(IA No. 57145/2020 – FOR EX-PARTE STAY; and, IA No. 57139/2020 – FOR ORAL HEARING)
62. Application for oral hearing of Review Petition is rejected.
63. Delay condoned.
64. The Review Petition is dismissed, in terms of the Signed Order.
65. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
Diary No. 15155/2020 (X)
66. Application seeking permission for oral hearing of Review Petition is rejected.
67. Delay condoned.
68. The Review Petition is dismissed, in terms of the Signed Order.
69. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
———
