Bhawana vs The State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 6654 Raj

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 6654 Raj
Judgement Date : 5 March, 2021

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Bhawana vs The State Of Rajasthan on 5 March, 2021

Bench: Dinesh Mehta

(1 of 3) [CW-1989/2021]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1989/2021

1. Bhawana D/o Lal Chand Bijarniyan, Aged About 30 Years, R/o V.p.o. Phephana, Tehsil Nohar, District Hanumangarh (Raj.) (Postd As Teacher Grade III L-II Subject English At Gups Athmanavas Bagara, Bhagara, District Jalore.)

2. Hina Bijarniya D/o Rameshwar Choudhary, Aged About 25 Years, R/o 28-A, Vasundhara Colony, Tonk Road, Jaipur (Raj.) (Posted As Teacher Grade III L-II Subject Science Maths At Gups Athmanavas Bagara, Bhagara, District Jalore.)

----Petitioners Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

3. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Jalore.

4. The District Education Officer, Elementary, Jalore.

                                                                ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Ramesh Kumar
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Manish Vyas, AAG



                    JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

                                    Order

05/03/2021

1. By way of present writ petition, petitioners herein have

raised a grievance that after being appointed, they have joined at

the place(s) which were made available to them, whereas the

persons who have been offered appointment vide list dated

11.01.2021 issued for Level-2, despite having lower merit

positions, have been offered postings vide order dated 18.01.2021

at places, which petitioners craved for.

2. Petitioners participated in recruitment for Teacher Grade III

Level - 1 & 2 and were placed high in merit. All of them have been

(2 of 3) [CW-1989/2021]

given appointment/posting in April, 2019. Whereas in the lists

referred to in para 1 above, candidates lower in merit have been

offered the Districts which many of the petitioners were denied.

3. The reasons for such discrepancies are that many vacancies

arose out of the first list as, many did not turn up for document

verification, many were declared unsuccessful consequent to

document verification whereas many did not come to join.

4. Pursuant to direction(s) of this Court to fill the vacant posts

(given in Kuldeep Kumar's case), the State has allocated

districts/posts which remained unfilled for above three reasons.

Naturally, various candidates who were lower in merit have been

allotted postings or districts which were earlier not available to the

petitioners at the first stage.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

respondents be directed to follow the directions given by Division

Bench of this Court in the case of State of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs.

Poonam Sharma (D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.815/2019) dated

29.08.2019.

6. Mr. Manish Vyas, learned AAG, appearing for the respondents

submitted that while providing place of posting, the respondent-

State allotted only those posts in the districts, where the posts

remained unfilled/vacant. The petitioners who have already joined,

cannot be shifted now and thus, action of the respondent-State is

valid. He added that petitioners' prayer, if accepted, would pose

practical and procedural difficulties to the State and hardship to

many candidates.

7. In considered opinion of this Court, the law laid down by

Division Bench in its judgment dated 29.08.2019, though

pertained to recruitment of Senior Teachers, is equally applicable

(3 of 3) [CW-1989/2021]

to all the recruitments, where the posts are filled in phased

manner.

8. This being the position, the present writ petition is disposed

of with the direction to the respondent-State to undertake the

exercise as has been ordered by the Division Bench in the case of

Poonam Sharma (supra).

9. For the sake of clarity, the directions issued by the Division

Bench in case of Poonam Sharma (supra) are reproduced

hereunder :-

(a) "The State shall issue a circular/order within four weeks, expressly stating that cadre allocations (to different divisions) made are only provisional and that such allocations would be made finally in a time bound manner, to be clearly indicated in such an order or circular;

(b) Await the receipt of all recommendations for 3 months and thereafter take up the process of determination of cadre allocations, in accordance with the rules and circulars applicable and complete such cadre allocations within 6 months from today;

(c) The State is further directed that cadre allocations made finally pursuant to the above directions, shall not be treated as transfers, but instead as revised initial postings of the concerned teachers.