Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 19407 (RAJ)

STATE OF RAJASTHAN v. DR. SUBHASH CHAND JAIN S/O LATE SHRI SHANKAR LAL JAIN

SAW/507/2020 · 2025-05-13

Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, Mukesh Rajpurohit

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:19990-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 507/2020 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Commissioner, College Education, Dr. Radha Krishnan Shiksha Sankul, J.l.n. Marg, Jaipur. ----Appellants Versus Dr. Subhash Chand Jain S/o Late Shri Shankar Lal Jain, Aged About 70 Years, R/o C-501, 502, Manglam The Grand Residency, Amarpali Path, Near Rangoli Garden, Kanak Vrindavan, Vaishali West, Jaipur. ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sankalp Vijay on behalf of Mr. Vigyan Shah, AAG For Respondent(s) : Mr. Keshav Parashar on behalf of Mr. Ashwinee Kumar Jaiman HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT Order 13/05/2025 1. Heard on admission. 2. Challenge to the order passed by learned Single Judge is premised mainly on the submission that the learned Single Judge failed to apply correct legal position in including the break period of three days for the purposes of grant of selection grade. According to the learned counsel for the State, the period of break was condoned for the limited purpose of pensionary benefits vide order dated 25.06.2008, but it could not be counted for the purposes of granting selection grade. [2025:RJ-JP:19990-DB] (2 of 2) [SAW-507/2020] 3. The order passed by learned Single Judge, which is assailed in this appeal, proceeds on the consideration that once the period of three days which was earlier treated as break in service was condoned and regularised, the continuity in service has to be maintained. In support of its view, the learned Single Judge has placed reliance upon the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Banaras Hindu University Varanasi & Anr. Vs. Dr. Indra Pratap Singh, 1992 Supp (2) SCC 2 and Ahalya A. Samtaney Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors., (2018) 9 SCC 92. 4. In view of the above, we do not find any merit in the appeal and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. Pending application, if any, also stands dismissed. (MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),CJ KAMLESH KUMAR-RAHUL/10