DR. LAL CHAND VERMA, S/O SHRI GOPAL RAM BALAI v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CW/9075/2025 · 2025-09-20
Mahendar Kumar Goyal
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 21035 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 21035 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:38753] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9075/2025 Dr. Lal Chand Verma, S/o Shri Gopal Ram Balai, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Village Bhadhwari, Tehsil Khandela, Dist. Sikar. ----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Department Of Medical, Health And Family Welfare Through Secretary, Swasthya Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur 302001.
2. Department Of Medical Education (Group-1), Through Deputy Secretary, Secretariat, Sukhdev Path, C-Scheme, Jaipur 302001. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gunjan Pathak with Mr. Aditya Bohra For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Judgment / Order 20/09/2025 This writ petition is filed with following prayers:-
“(i) To pass appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus/ qua warranto/prohibition etc. to direct the Respondents to withdraw the impugned Orders dated 07.03.2025; 17.04.2025 and letter dated 06.05.2025; (ii) To pass appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus/ qua warranto/prohibition etc. to direct the Respondents to consider the name of the petitioner for the purpose of promotion
for
the
current
year; (iii) To pass appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus/ qua warranto/prohibition etc. in
[2025:RJ-JP:38753] (2 of 2) [CW-9075/2025] line with the earlier order passed by this Hon'ble Court to grant the benefits to the petitioner from 28.03.2017 considering there is no break in the service as the petitioner has been always serving with the Respondent State. (iv) Any other relief as it may please to this Hon’ble Court may kindly be granted.” Indisputably, the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy under the Rajasthan Civil Services (Service Matters Appellate Tribunals) Act, 1976.
Learned counsel for the petitioner could not satisfy this Court that as to why, without exhausting the alternative remedy, the writ jurisdiction has been invoked. In view thereof, this civil writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to invoke the alternative and efficacious remedy. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J Manish/44