Supreme Court's bench of Justices B.R. Gavai and KV. Viswanathan set aside the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court's Division Bench by which, the Division Bench dismissed the appeal of the appellant confirming the order of the Single Judge dated November 27, 2018. Justices Gavai and Viswanathan bench found that the Division Bench has erred in applying the Court's decision in Dinesh Chandra Damor vs. State of Rajasthan instead of applying the reasoning in the judgment in the State of Rajasthan vs. Ankul Singhal and Rakesh Gaur vs. The State of Rajasthan delivered by the High Court to the facts of this case.
In the case of Ankul Singhal, it was held that it will be improper to discriminate inter se among a homogenous group of students admitted for the academic session 2009-10. As was pointed out therein, it could not be that those students admitted in the first round of counselling would be eligible, even with less than 50% marks in graduation, while the others admitted in the subsequent rounds of counselling would not be. The Court observed: "It was on this reasoning that Rakesh Gaur (supra) was given relief. Rakesh Gaur (supra) was a case identically situated with the case of the appellant. What is sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander too."
In its concluding paragraph, the Supreme Court's judgement reads: "We direct the respondent-authorities to treat the appointment given to the appellant, pursuant to the interim order of the Division Bench dated 23.10.2021, as a regular appointment and after reinstating the appellant grant consequential benefits. We direct that except for the period the appellant actually worked, he shall not be entitled to any back wages. However, fitment of pay shall be granted." The judgement was delivered on September 10, 2024. It was authored by Justice Viswanathan.
No comments:
Post a Comment