[2025:RJ-JP:12839-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 913/2020 Prabhu Lal Gurjar Son Of Bajrang Lal Gurjar, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Village Lamba, Tehsil Todarai Singh, District Tonk, Rajasthan. ----Appellant Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The District Collector, Tonk 3. The Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Todairaisingh District Tonk. 4. The Village Panchayat Lamba Kalan, Tehsil Todarai Singh And District Tonk Rajasthan Through Village Development Officer / Secretary. 5. Ramrakha Son Of Shri Ramnarayan Mali, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Gediya, Village Panchayat Lamba Kalan, Tehsil Todaraisingh, District Tonk, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kapil Prakash Mathur, AAG with Mr. Ashutosh Udawat Ms. Divya Rathore HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 20/03/2025 None present on behalf of the appellant even in the second round. On earlier occasion also, none has present on behalf of the appellant to argue the matter. [2025:RJ-JP:12839-DB] (2 of 2) [SAW-913/2020] By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the order dated 13.10.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12043/2020, whereby, the writ petition filed on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed. We have perused the order dated 13.10.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition observed as under:- “Counsel for the petitioner submits that he has been wrongfully terminated from the post of Security Guard and he has been appointed on 1.5.2018 and worked upto 10.10.2019 whereafter his services were dispensed with and another person has been appointed as Security Guard in his place. The grievance of the petitioner is with regard to wrongful termination as the petitioner is working as workman at Seva Kendra and it would fall within the ambit of the “industry” and therefore the petitioner can always raise the dispute before the concerned Labour Court.” We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the learned Single Judge which discloses that the liberty has already been granted to the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy available to him under the law. In that view of the matter, the present appeal stands dismissed. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J Upendra Pratap Singh /91