NEERAJ KANWAR PARMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Moti Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in furtherance of the appeal filed by the respondent-Baburam, the matter was being heard by a competent State Level Screening Committee and as a matter of fact the case was heard by four persons namely; Ms. Manju, Mr. Bhagwat Singh Deval, Ms. Suchi Sharma and Mr. Akhil Arora on 30/1/2019 and the matter was posted for pronouncement of the order on 14/2/2019. On 14/2/2019, since the matter was listed for pronouncement of the order, the petitioner did not think it necessary to remain present simply for hearing of the order. But to her surprise, the respondents have not only reheard the matter without issuing any notice and/or intimation of hearing to her, they have pronounced the order on 20/2/2019.

(2.) Inviting attention of the Court towards the record of the proceedings, more particularly the proceedings drawn on 14/2/2019, learned counsel contends that on earlier occasion (30/1/2019), Ms. Suchi Sharma heard the matter and the order was reserved and before the same could be pronounced, she was transferred to other department for which the matter was taken up for consideration by new incumbent namely; Mr. Sawarmal Verma, who is alleged to have heard the matter, but in absence of the petitioner.

(3.) Learned counsel contends that the impugned order dtd. 20/2/2019 has been passed by the Committee is illegal and against the principles of nature justice, inasmuch as the Commissioner and requisite members of the State Level Screening Committee alongwith Mr. Sawarmal Verma heard the appeal, the present petitioner was not available.