[2025:RJ-JP:15977] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3150/2002 Smt. Gurvinder Kaur Bajawa W/o Dr. Gurjeet Singh Bajwa, 515, Agrasen Nagar, Sriganganagar Rajasthan ----Petitioner Versus 1. Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal, Jaipur Through Presiding Officer. 2. Managing Committee of Shri Arodvansh Senior Secondary School, Jawahar Nagar, Sriganganagar through Secretayr. 3. The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Himanshi Bhatia with Ms. Kusum Saini on behalf of Mr. C.L. Saini For Respondent(s) : Ms. Namita Parihar, Dy. GC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 09/04/2025 1. Being aggrieved by order dated 05.02.2002 passed by the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal, Jaipur (hereinafter to be referred as ‘Tribunal’) in Application No. 77/99, the instant writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed in the year 1995 on ad hoc basis, later on her service was confirmed vide order dated 02.05.1998. Counsel further submits that the aforesaid order of confirmation dated 02.05.1998 was arbitrarily withdrawn by the respondents vide order dated 12.12.1998 without giving her any opportunity of [2025:RJ-JP:15977] (2 of 2) [CW-3150/2002] hearing. The order of withdrawing the earlier order of confirmation dated 02.05.1998 was put to challenge by the petitioner by way of filing application No. 77/99 before the learned Tribunal. 3. Bare perusal of order dated 05.02.2002 would reveal that the Tribunal has quashed the order dated 12.12.1998 and liberty has been granted to the respondent- Management that in case respondent- Management intends to review the confirmation order dated 02.05.1998, or otherwise to cancel the same, then the petitioner- applicant shall be granted opportunity of hearing before taking any such action. 4. Counsel for the petitioner has utterly failed to point out any patent illegality or perversity in the order passed by the Tribunal. The order impugned before the Tribunal has already been quashed and since only liberty has been granted to act in accordance with law after granting opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, in case the management intends to review and cancel the confirmation order, there is no reason to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal. 5. The writ petition is totally misconceived. Hence, the present writ petition is dismissed. 6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (ANAND SHARMA),J DIVYA SAINI /NEERU -20