LALITA KUMAWAT D/O SHRI YUGAL KISHORE KUMAWAT v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CW/8560/2026 · 2026-05-25
Anand Sharma
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 7786 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 7786 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:22086] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8560/2026 Lalita Kumawat D/o Shri Yugal Kishore Kumawat, Aged About 39 Years, R/o P.no. 106, Sundram Vatika, Sirsi Link Road, Govindpura, Jhotwara, Jaipur, Rajasthan- 302012. ----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Education Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.) 302005.
2. Director, Elementary Education, Education Department, Lalgarh Palace, Near Unnamed Road, Samta Nagar, Bikaner- 334001.
3. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Through Secretary, Rajya Krishi Prabandh Sansthan Parisar, Durgapura, Jaipur- 302018. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anand Sharma (through V.C.) For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA
Order 25/05/2026
1. Only grievance raised by the petitioner in the writ petition is that although the petitioner has been selected under specially abled category on the post of Teacher Gr.-III Level-II (English), yet only on account of the fact that the respondents, at their own, delayed appointment of the petitioner, ignoring the merit-cum-preference as well as guidelines issued by the respondents for the purpose of giving posting to physically disabled persons, the petitioner has been posted at a distant place, which is causing grave inconvenience to the petitioner.
[2026:RJ-JP:22086] (2 of 2) [CW-8560/2026]
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although petitioner has submitted a representation before the Competent Authority, yet no decision whatsoever has been taken by the respondents upon the representation submitted by the petitioner.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that petitioner intends to give fresh representation for seeking redressal of her grievances along with necessary documents and judgments delivered by different Courts, which may be directed to be decided in a time bound manner.
4. In view of limited grievance raised by the petitioner, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of the present petition with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Competent Authority highlighting her grievances along with necessary documents and, in case, such representation is filed, the Competent Authority is directed to decide the same, by a speaking and reasoned order, within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of representation along with certified copy of this
order.
5. Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of.
6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of this case.
7. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.
(ANAND SHARMA),J 50/DAKSH