MANGILAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Special Appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance has been filed against the judgment passed by the learned single Judge of this Court on Nov. 9, 1973 in a writ petition filed by Mangilal -- Appellant against the respondents.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case giving rise to this special appeal are that the petitioner was appointed as a cleaner in the Directorate of Plant Protection (Quarantine and Storage) of the Ministry of Food and Agriculture, Government of India. In the year 1953 he was appointed as Driver. In the year 1962, while he was posted at Suratgarh the vehicle which he was driving met with an accident. On 16th Jan., 1967 order (Ex. 1) was issued by the Deputy Locust Entomologist, Jodhpur ' asking him to appear before the licensing authority, Delhi for a test. He was declared unfit on account of his weak eye-sight. By the order dated June 13, 1967 (Ex. 2) he was directed to get his eye-sight tested by the Principal, Medical & Health Officer, Jodhpur. He was found fit. On Dec. 21, 1967 by order Ex. 4 he was again asked to appear for test at Delhi. Appellant protested against that order but he was informed by memorandum Ex. 10 dated Feb. 12/ 13, 1968 that his representation was rejected and he should keep ready for the test. On May 17, 1968 he appeared before the licensing authority at Delhi. According to the appellant he was not tested and was asked to return to Jodhpur. The case of the respondents was that the appellant was tested and was found unfit. By the order dated 13th May, 1968 (Ex. 12) the Motor Licensing Authority, Delhi revoked the driving licence held by the appellant and directed him to surrender the driving licence to the authority at the earliest. In consequence to that order the appellant was reverted to his substantive post of Messenger-cum-Cleaner with effect from 30th Nov., 1968 vide Order Ex. 11 passed by the Deputy Locust Entomologist, Jodhpur,

(3.) Being aggrieved by the orders revoking his driving licence and consequently reverting him to his substantive post of cleaner, the appellant filed the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in this Court.