Rajasthan High Court: In a writ petition challenging the removal of the petitioner from the post of Chairman of the Rajasthan Madrasa Board, without providing reasons and without establishing any disqualifications under Section 7 of the Rajasthan Madrasa Board Act, 2020, a single-judge bench comprising of Avneesh Jhingan, J., stayed the implementation of the order removing the petitioner from the post of Chairman of the Rajasthan Madrasa Board.
In the instant matter, the petitioner was appointed as the Chairman of the Rajasthan Madrasa Board by an order issued by the State Government on 25-01-2023 for a tenure of three years. However, the Minority Department issued an order on 29-02-2024, cancelling the petitioner’s appointment and removing him from the post, just 13 months into his tenure. The petitioner alleged that no reasons were provided for his removal, and he was not given an opportunity to be heard before the decision was made. The petitioner argued that under Section 7 of the Rajasthan Madrasa Board Act, 2020, he could only be removed from the post if he had the disqualifications mentioned therein, of which he had none. Thus, the petitioner contended that his removal before the completion of his three-year tenure was illegal. The State, represented by the Additional Advocate General, argued that they had the authority to both appoint and remove the petitioner from the post.
The Court stayed the implementation of the order to remove the petitioner from the post. The court found merit in the petitioner’s argument that his removal may only occur upon establishing disqualifications as per Section 7 of the Rajasthan Madrasa Board Act, 2020, of which there was no evidence and issued a notice of motion and re-stayed the removal order. The case was scheduled to be heard further on 20-04-2024.
[Hazi Mahboob Diwan Chopdar v. State of Rajasthan, 2024 SCC OnLine Raj 953, order dated 09-04-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Sunil Samdaria, Counsel for the Petitioner
Mr. Utkarsh Dwivedi for Mr. Basant Singh Chhaba, AAG, Counsel for the Respondent
