DR. DEEPAK GUPTA v. SWAMI KESHWANAND RAJ. AGRI.UNI. AND ANR.
Court: High Court of Rajasthan
Bench: DINESH MEHTA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Rajasthan judgment dated 2020-12-03. DR. DEEPAK GUPTA v. SWAMI KESHWANAND RAJ. AGRI.UNI. AND ANR. Read the judgment and case details on...
Judgment text
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR (1) S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6848/2020 Dr. Deepak Gupta S/o Shri Ramji Lal Gupta, Aged About 47 Years, R/o D-116, Karni Nagar, Lalgarh, Bikaner, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary Department Of Agriculture (Group-3), Jaipur Rajasthan. 2. Swami Keshwanand Rajasthan Agriculture University, Bikaner Rajasthan, Through Its Registrar. 3. Registrar, Swami Keshwanand Rajasthan Agriculture University, Bikaner, Rajasthan. 4. Shri Karan Narendra Agriculture University, Jobner, Jaipur, Rajasthan Through Its Registrar. 5. Registrar, Shri Karan Narendra Agriculture University, Jobner, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents Connected With (2) S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8720/2017 Dr. Deepak Gupta S/o Shri Ramji Lal Gupta, R/o D-116, Karni Nagar, Lalgarh, Bikaner, Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Swami Keshwanand Rajasthan Agricultural University Bikaner Raj. , Through Its Vice-Chancellor. 2.
Registrar, Swami Keshwanand Rajasthan Agricultural University, Bikaner, Raj. ----Respondents (3) S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4648/2020 Dr. Deepak Gupta S/o Shri Ramji Lal Gupta, Aged About 47 Years, R/o D-116, Karni Nagar, Lalgarh, Bikaner, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Swami Keshwanand Rajasthan Agriculture University, Bikaner Rajasthan, Through Its Registrar. 2. Registrar, Swami Keshwanand Rajasthan Agriculture (2 of 3) [CW-6848/2020] University, Bikaner, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nikhil Jain, through Cisco Webex Mr. Nikhil Dumgawat, through Cisco Webex For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manish Shishodia, through Cisco Webex JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA Order SBCWP No. 6488/2020 & 4648/2020 03/12/2020 1. Mr. Shishodia, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.
2 & 3 submits that all reliefs claimed by the petitioner including acceptance of his resignation has been granted by the respondent- University and even formal order in relation to petitioner’s resignation as desired has been passed. 2. At this juncture, Mr. Dungawat, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that true it is, that formal order has been passed, however, petitioner has not been paid his monetary and other benefits flowing from acceptance of resignation. He prays that these petitions (SBCWP No. 6848/2020) and (SBCWP No. 4648/2020) be kept pending at least till the respondents pay the retiral dues and other benefits to the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent University while assuring that the needful would be done within a period of two months from today, submits that no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping these writ petitions pending. (3 of 3) [CW-6848/2020] 4. In view of the assurance so given by Mr.
Manish Shishodia on behalf of the respondents- University, the proceedings in these writ petitions are closed. 5. Needless to observe that if the respondents do not do the needful by 28. 02. 2021, the petitioner shall be free to take up appropriate proceedings, including revival of the present writ petitions. (SBCWP No. 8720/2017) 6. Mr. Dungawat, learned counsel for the petitioner does not press the present writ petition which was filed challenging the action of the respondents in not giving appropriate reservation to physically disabled persons. 7. Permission granted. 8. Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed as withdrawn. 9. All the captioned writ petition and interlocutory applications stand disposed of. (DINESH MEHTA),J 9-11-pooja/-
Source: High Court of Rajasthan. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.