Hukma Ram vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 12468 Raj

(1 of 4) [CW-9552/2021]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9552/2021

1. Hukma Ram S/o Jetha Ram, Aged About 53 Years, Laxmi Vihar Colony, Gali No. 4, Jaipur Road, Bikaner.

2. Meenkshi D/o Om Prakash Chawla W/o Davinder Kumar, Aged About 38 Years, House No. Biv 277, Street No. 12, Nai Abadi, Abohar District Fazilaka (Punjab) At Present Patwar Mohalla, Near Haryali Kisan Bazar, Ward No. 7, Sadul Sahar, District Ganganagar.

3. Ramkishan Meena S/o Narayan Lal Meena, Aged About 56 Years, Village Pilwa (Khoda Ki Dhani) Post Chandwaji, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur.

4. Vinita Kumari D/o Mahendra Singh W/o Chandar Pal Jandu, Aged About 38 Years, House No. 68-A, Sarswati Nagar, Sriganganagar.

5. Vishal Doda S/o Sada Lal Doda, Aged About 43 Years, Ward No. 45, Suratgarh, District Ganganagar.

6. Suresh Kumar Maan S/o Parbhati Lal Maan, Aged About 43 Years, Village And Post Gorir, Tehsil Khetri, District Jhunjhunu.

7. Balram S/o Ram Narayan, Aged About 47 Years, Village Shyopura Post Ramsara Jakhand Tehsil Suratgarh, District Ganganagar.

8. Manak Chand Pareek S/o Rameshwar Lal Pareek, Aged About 42 Years, 408, Ward No. 5, Durga Colony, Kaloo, District Bikaner.

9. Sumitra D/o Banwari Lal W/o Puran Mal, Aged About 42 Years, Vpo Govindpura (Basari) Vaya Khejaroli, Shahpura, District Jaipur.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Elementary Education, Government Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

3. Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner.

(2 of 4) [CW-9552/2021]

4. Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

5. Joint Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner Zone, Bikaner.

6. Joint Director, Secondary Education, Jaipur Zone, Jaipur.

7. District Education Officer, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

8. District Education Officer, Secondary Education, Bikaner.

9. District Education Officer, Elementary Education, Jaipur.

10. District Education Officer, Secondary Education, Jaipur.

11. District Education Officer, Elementary Education, Jhunjhunu.

12. District Education Officer, Secondary Education, Jhunjhunu.

13. District Education Officer, Elementary Education, Sriganganagar.

14. District Education Officer, Secondary Education, Sriganganagar.

                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)           :    Mr. Ramdev Potalia
For Respondent(s)           :    Mr. K. K. Bissa



                     JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

                                     Order

10/08/2021

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue

raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by judgment

of this Court in Manoj Khandelwal & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. :

S.B.C.W.P. No. 7283/2014, decided on 16.07.2014 at Jaipur Bench

and the said judgment has been followed in Krishan Lal & Ors. v. The

State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B.C.W.P. No. 19179/2017, decided on

30.10.2017 at Jaipur Bench. The petitioners are also entitled to

the same relief as granted in the case of Manoj Khandelwal

(supra) and Krishan Lal (supra) claims learned counsel.

(3 of 4) [CW-9552/2021]

In view of the submissions made, the writ petition filed by

the petitioners is disposed of with the similar directions as given in

the case of Manoj Khandelwal (supra), which read as under:-

"This Court in Suman Bai and Another Vs. State and Others - 2009 (1) WLC (Raj.) 381, held that candidates in lower order of merit cannot become entitled merely because they had approached court earlier. Petitioners had a fresh cause of action for approaching in such situation and their writ petition not barred either as res judicata or as being him in properly constituted. This directed the respondents to treat petitioners senior to respondents, who were in lower order of merit.

It is further contended in the writ petition that in the matter of School Lecturers (English) in the same Department, where appointments were delayed because of the fault of the State authorities, the candidates were accorded appointment from the date the candidates stood lower in merit were appointed and they have been granted all consequential benefits of services.

The petitioners approached the respondents by way of representations for extending them same benefits of service which have been granted to the candidates who stood lower in merit than the petitioners, but till date nothing has been done. Hence, this writ petition on behalf of the petitioners for a direction to the respondents to treat their appointment from the date the candidates lower in merit, were given, with all consequential benefits of service, such as seniority, continuity of service, pay fixation, grant of annual grade increments.

Having regard to the facts of the case, writ petition is disposed of requiring the petitioners to make a representation to respondent no.2 - Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner, alongwith a copy of this order, who shall, after verifying the facts stated above, consider and decide the same by a speaking order within a period of three months from the date of its making, addressing the grievance of the petitioners for extending them the relief as prayed for, as the candidates, who stood lower in merit, are getting benefit of higher pay, seniority, annual grade increments and other service benefits including the selection scales. If the respondent no.2 decides to place the petitioners above in seniority than the candidates who stood lower in merit, then the petitioners would be entitled to all benefits of seniority but they would be entitled only to notional benefits."

For the purpose aforesaid, the petitioners shall file

representation before the competent authority giving out the

requisite details along with certified copy of the order instant

(4 of 4) [CW-9552/2021]

within a period of four weeks from today. On receipt of the

representation, the concerned respondent shall decide the same,

in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the

date of receipt of the representation and accord notional benefits

to the petitioners from the date persons similarly situated to them

and lower in merit were given appointment.

Upon consideration of the representation so filed, if

respondents find the case(s) of the petitioner (s) to be covered by

the judgment(s) aforesaid, before giving actual benefits, an

undertaking shall be procured from the concerned petitioner(s) to

the effect that their rights/entitlements shall be subservient to the

fate of the judgment(s) aforesaid and in case the same is reversed

or modified in any manner, he/she shall also be liable for

restitution of any benefits/emoluments so received.

The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.

(DINESH MEHTA),J 278-A.Arora/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)