SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Raj) 1557

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
ARUN MONGA, J.
Anil Paliwal, S/o Shri Chiranji Lal Paliwal – Petitioner 
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Government Of Rajasthan and Ors. – Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17086 Of 2022 Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13163 of 2022, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14767 Of 2023 
Decided On : 01-04-2025


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Dr. Nikhil Dungawat.
For the Respondents: Mr. Priyanshu Gopa.

Conditions for deemed resignation under Rule 86 of the Rajasthan Service Rules were not met as the petitioner abandoned duty without applying for leave.

Headnote:(A) Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 - Rule 86(4)(a) - Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958 - Deemed resignation - Petitioner deemed to have resigned due to absence from duty without leave since 05.05.2022 - Petitioner challenged the order treating him as resigned, asserting absence was not in line with Rule 86 - Court found that conditions for invoking deemed resignation were not met, as petitioner abandoned duty without applying for leave - Respondents allowed to proceed with disciplinary action for willful absence. (Paras 7.1, 7.2, 10, 11)

(B) Employment Law - Assignment of duties - Petitioner challenged assignment of non-teaching duties, claiming it violated his rights as a teacher - Court upheld the assignment under Rule 5(iii) of RVRES Rules, noting no prohibition against such arrangement was cited. (Paras 6, 9)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a lecturer, was deemed to have resigned after being absent from duty without leave since May 2022. He challenged multiple orders regarding his employment status and salary.

Findings of Court:
The court set aside the deemed resignation order but allowed disciplinary proceedings for willful absence.

Issues: Whether the petitioner was rightly treated as having resigned and whether the assignment of non-teaching duties was lawful.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the conditions for deemed resignation under Rule 86 were not satisfied, emphasizing the need for proper leave application.

Result: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14767/2023 partly allowed; other petitions dismissed.

Order :

(ARUN MONGA, J.)

1. Since above titled petitions involve common inter connected issues and facts, they are being decided through this common order.

2. The petitioner is before this Court having preferred three writ petitions viz. :-

2.1. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14767/2023 inter-alia seeking quashing of an order dated 07.09.2023 (Annexure-23) whereby, petitioner was pronounced as "deemed to have resigned from service" w.e.f. 05.05.2022.

2.2. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17086/2022 challenging an order dated 22.04.2022 whereby, petitioner was directed to report for joining for "work arrangement" and assigned duties other than teaching job, which he declined.

2.3. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13163/2022, inter alia, for a direction to the respondents to release the salary of the petitioner from the month of May, 2022.

3. The factual narrative is taken from S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14767/2023, wherein challenge is to the order dated 07.09.2023 (Annexure-23) passed under Rule 86(4)(a) of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 (for short, 'the RSR Rules') vide which, the petitioner's absence was treated as deemed resignation.

3.1. The petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in Government aided Teachers' Training College and thereafter, he was absorbed in Government service.

3.2. The respondents issued order dated 22.04.2022 to the Principals of the five Government Colleges to relieve the B.Ed. faculty members for reporting at the office of Commissioner, College Education. The petitioner was relieved along with other teachers on 22.04.2022 itself. He reported for duty on 04.05.2022 after availing of the joining period (Yogkaal). However, the same day itself, he applied for Headquarter Leave due to personal exigency, while submitting that he will apply for the appropriate Leave admissible to him.

3.3. Thereafter, vide communication dated 05.05.2022, the petitioner requested for granting him summer vacation when he was at the Office of the Assistant Director, Regional Office, Udaipur. The petitioner was served with a show cause notice on 05.05.2022 asking him to explain as to why he reported late for duty. The petitioner gave his detailed explanation on 07.05.2022.

3.4. The petitioner received another show cause notice dated 17.05.2022 from the Additional Commissioner to explain as to why proceedings be not initiated against him for insubordination. The petitioner gave his explanation vide communication dated 18.05.2022 and also on 19.05.2022.

3.5. Since the grievance of the petitioner regarding grant of joining period and TA/DA as well as for grant of summer vacations remained unaddressed, he preferred a writ petition bearing No. 8290/2022, which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 03.06.2022 while directing the respondents to decide the representation filed by the petitioner on 26.05.2022.

3.6. Besides the grievance of the petitioner as stated above, the salary of the petitioner since month of May, 2022 was stopped by the Respondents. Being aggrieved, the petitioner thus preferred writ petition no.13163/2022. The petitioner also filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17086/2022 inter-alia challenging the order dated 22.04.2022 whereby, he was directed to give joining for "work arrangement" and assigned duties other than teaching job, which he refused. On 22.11.2022, this Court issued notices and the matter is pending further adjudication.

3.7. A show cause notice dated 12.12.2022 was issued to the petitioner, alleging absence from duty since 05.05.2022, under Rule 17 of Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958. The petitioner submitted a detailed reply on 18.12.2022 narrat

3.8. A communication dated 29.05.2023 was again issued to the petitioner granting last opportunity to him join within seven days, failing which proceedings under Rule 86 of the Rules of 1951 would be initiated. The petitioner responded to the same vide communication dated 30.05.2023.

3.9. The respondents eventually passed an order dated 07

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top