Rajasthan High Court Calls for Investigation into Tribunal Operations
In a significant development, the Rajasthan High Court has mandated an investigation into the operations of the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal (RCSAT) following allegations by a government school teacher. The teacher, Sharvan Lal Khorwal, claimed that a stay order favoring him was inexplicably replaced by a different order on the official record, denying him relief in his promotion cancellation case. The case, titled Sharvan Lal Khorwal v. State of Rajasthan, has raised critical questions about the tribunal’s functioning.
Court’s Directive for Inquiry
Justice Ravi Chirania, presiding over the matter, issued an order on April 17, demanding that the State Government initiate an inquiry into the incident. This decision came after Justice Chirania expressed dissatisfaction with the explanation provided by the Tribunal Registrar regarding the discrepancy. The Registrar had attributed the error to an unidentified clerk, a justification that the court found “highly unreasonable” and seemingly “false on the face of the record.” Consequently, the court instructed the Secretary of the State’s Department of Personnel to determine whether the clerk was genuinely involved or unjustly blamed.
Background of the Case
The issue began when Khorwal challenged the revocation of his promotion, which had been granted almost nine years prior. On July 15, 2025, the RCSAT reportedly heard the case and granted a stay in open court. The tribunal’s website also indicated that interim protection had been provided. However, upon requesting a certified copy, Khorwal discovered that the official case file contained a different order dated August 8, 2025. This order merely issued notices without granting interim relief, despite no listing of the matter on that date.
High Court’s Response to Allegations
Justice Anand Sharma, addressing the preliminary allegations in March, acknowledged the serious implications of Khorwal’s claims, which questioned the tribunal’s integrity. Consequently, the court directed the Tribunal Registrar to submit an affidavit detailing the circumstances of the order discrepancy. The subsequent April hearing led Justice Chirania to reject the Registrar’s explanation, notably criticizing the identification failure of the responsible clerk in the affidavit.
Next Steps and Implications
The High Court has tasked the Department of Personnel with conducting a comprehensive inquiry and reporting back by the next hearing date, set for July 1. The court also urged the State to contemplate disciplinary actions against the Registrar and any officials implicated in the incident. This case continues to unfold, as stakeholders await the inquiry’s findings and potential repercussions for the tribunal’s operational credibility.
More Read
The implications of this investigation could be far-reaching, potentially impacting the procedural integrity of tribunals and reinforcing the importance of transparent judicial processes.
