TEJVEER SINGH AND ANR. Vs. RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two applications, one for recalling of order dated 11.03.2010 and another for review thereof, have been filed by Petitioners - Tejveer Singh, Hans Raj Dupga (Petition No. 150/2010) and Krishan Lal Ninaniya (Petition No. 06681/2010), whose writ petitions were decided by common order dated 11.03.2010. When writ petition was taken up for arguments, it was given out by learned Counsel appearing for parties that pursuant to DB judgment of this Court in Ranjeet Singh Godara and Ors. v/s. Rajasthan Housing Board and Anr. DB Civil Writ Petition No. 7063/1993 decided on 25.07.2007, Respondents are now undertaking exercise of regular Departmental Promotion Committee (for short, 'DPC') and that a coordinate Bench of this Court by its order dated 28.05.2007 in Writ Petition No. 3845/2003 directed Respondents to consider case of SC/ST also as per reservation policy of the State, even if promotions are made on ad -hoc basis. Petitioners primarily approached this Court with prayer that they should be given benefit of reservation. The court pointedly asked Petitioners whether subsequent to aforesaid judgment any further promotions have been made on ad - hoc/temporary basis, they could not give answer thereto. Now these applications have been filed for recalling and reviewing of judgment on premise that even if DB judgment of this Court dated 25.07.2007 when Respondents conducted fresh DPC, they have not correctly applied the law of reservation and that certain posts of deputation were not included in total number of posts while making determination of vacancies and sending them to DPC. On query by the court, it is submitted that by making such illegalities Respondents have issued promotion order dated 07.09.2007 wherein they have illegally not promoted Petitioners.

(2.) On query by court, learned Counsel for parties submitted that though this subsequent order of promotion dated 07.09.2007 was placed on record after it was issued but they did not seek any amendment of writ petition so as to challenge the same.

(3.) In any case when subsequent order of promotion was not assailed, its validity could not be gone into as it was a fresh cause of action although incidentally arguments which Petitioners were advancing when they originally filed these writ petitions, may have been available to them even when they challenged order of promotion dated 07.09.2007, however that cannot be a reason to recall or review the order. It would, however, be open to Petitioners to challenge aforesaid order of promotion now by filing fresh writ petitions so that Respondents may also get an opportunity to meet such challenge.