Ram Dan vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 15558 Raj

(1 of 3) [CW-13970/2021]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13970/2021

1. Ram Dan S/o Pappu Dan, Aged About 35 Years, Naganiyon Ka Bas, Village And Post Sinthal, Tehsil And District Bikaner, At Present Posted At Govt. Senior Secondary School Siyana, Kolayat, Dist Bikaner.

2. Santosh Kumar Nayak S/o Kishna Ram Nayak, Aged About 33 Years, Post At Govt Senior Secondary School Bithnok, Kolayat, R/o Hanuman Hatha, Near Mm Hospital, Nayak Basti, Bikaner.

3. Vinod Kumar Choudhary S/o Kamal Singh Sangwan, Aged About 42 Years, Posted At Govt Senior Secondary School Punrasar, Sridungargarh, R/o Shiv Colony, Shivbadi Road, Shivghati, Gali No.5, Bikaner.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Education Department Rajasthan, Jaipur.

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

3. The District Education Officer, Secondary Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. K. S. Rajpurohit.

For Respondent(s)         :



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

                                     Order

06/10/2021

This writ petition has been filed by petitioner seeking reliefs

as indicated in the writ petition.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the

issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by

judgment of this Court in Manoj Khandelwal & Ors. v. State of

(2 of 3) [CW-13970/2021]

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, and therefore, the petitioner is also entitled to the same

relief as granted in the case of Manoj Khandelwal (supra) and

Krishan Lal (supra).

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

the petitioner 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

(3 of 3) [CW-13970/2021]

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."

(ARUN BHANSALI),J

237-pradeep/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)