SHAITAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petitioner -Shaitan Singh, aggrieved against the judgment dated 6.12.1995 passed in Civil Writ Petition No. 778/94 by the learned Single Judge has filed the present civil special appeal wherein he had impugned the order of terminating his services, Anex.8, and being aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single Judge has come up in the present appeal.

(2.) THE admitted facts, as narrated in the writ petition, are that late Shri Narpat Singh, police constable, father of the petitioner, had died while in service. According to the petitioner he was entitled for the appointment in the Rajasthan State Police Service under the Rules i.e. Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servant dying while in service Rules, 1975 (Hereinafter for short called 'the Rules of 1975'). Despite his having made the application, his request for appointment was not aceeded to, with a result, that he filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1088/90 and the High Court ultimately allowed the civil writ petition on 15.11.90 and directed the respondents to appoint the petitioner on a suitable job as per his qualifications. Even after getting a favorable order from the High Court and applying for appropriate appointment for the post of L.D.C. for which he was having the minimum qualifications, the respondents did not implement the judgment of the High Court, with the result, the petitioner had to file the contempt petition No. 195/91 for the implementation of the directions of the High Court. It was only after filing of the contempt petition that the petitioner was given appointment letter for the post of L.D.C. vide order dt.23.1.1992 attached as Annex. 1 and petitioner joined on the same day.

(3.) IT is submitted by the petitioner that even though it was not required but still in Annex. 1 i.e. appointment letter, a condition has been illegally imposed to the fact that the petitioner will have to pass typing test within six months. He was asked to appear in the typing test in the month of July and October but he could not be so, because of his ill health and because of his physical and mental agony, he was suffering, all through, on account of his family life and because of the illness of his wife who died on 15.12.1992. Vide Annex.7 dt. 20th May, 1993 the petitioner was told to appear in the examination of typing on 19.6.1993 and was further told in case he does not appear or qualify the test, his services would be deemed to be unsatisfactory and that he would be removed from the service. The petitioner had pointed out to the authorities that because of family difficulties, he could not learn the type writing and did ask for time. Ultimately, the test was scheduled to be held on 19.8.1993. The petitioner who was still not prepared to take the examination had written to the department, for postponing the test but the same was not agreed to, with the result the petitioner could not quality the typing test which resulted in terminating the services of the petitioner vide Annex.8 dt. 20th August, 1993 i.e. after almost 2 -3 days of holding the test.