Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 21295 (RAJ)

KAMLESH MEENA v. STATE OF RAJ AND ORS

CW/13923/2010 · 2025-02-18

Anoop Kumar Dhand

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13923/2010 Kamlesh Meena S/o Shri Kanhaiya Lal Meena, Gram Panchayat Jeenapur, Tehsil And District Sawai Madhopur Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Rajasthan Through Secretary, Department Of Finance, State Secretariat, Jaipur 2. The Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur 3. The Commissioner, State Employment Guarantee Council, Narega, Jaipur 4. The Programme Coordinator / Officer Narega Cum District Collector, Sawai Madhopur 5. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Sawai Madhopur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : None present JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 18/02/2025 1. By way of filing this petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 18.05.2010 passed by the respondents, by which the petitioner and other contractual employees were directed to execute fresh contract agreement. 2. Reply to the writ petition has been submitted by the respondents, which indicates that as per the Government order dated 27.02.2010, all the contractual employees were (2 of 2) [CW-13923/2010] directed to execute fresh agreement, in the new format and thereafter, by virtue of order dated 17.05.2010 passed by this Court, the said contractual employees were not expected to execute the new format of agreement and their services could not be terminated, on account of not doing the aforesaid needful exercise. In pursuance of the orders passed by this Court, the petitioner was allowed to remain in service on the post of Rojgar Sahayak by the respondents, hence, under the changed circumstances, no cause of action survives with the petitioner to continue with this petition, as the relief sought for, has already been granted by the respondents and the same has become infructuous. 3. In view of the above, the instant writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand dismissed. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/69