VIBHA BALUNI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has approached this Court on the ground that the respondents be directed to consider her case for absorption under the Rajasthan Voluntary Rural Education Services Rules, 2010.

(2.) Shri D.P. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that respondent no.4- institution namely Tagore Vidhya Bhawan was receiving grant-in-aid for last several years, but it was stopped sometime ago because of certain irregularities on the part of the management, therefore, for that reason, respondents are not considering the case of the petitioner.

(3.) Petitioner has challenged validity of Rule 2(g) and 2(k) and Rule 4 and 5 of the Rajasthan Voluntary Rural Education Services Rules, 2010 to argue that the consideration for absorption in government service cannot be confined to only such teachers, who are working against sanctioned post receiving grant-in-aid. This should be made open even for those who were working in recognised private school even if they are not2 receiving grant-in-aid.