Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Parmila Rani vs State Of Rajasthan on 26 October, 2021
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15104/2021
Parmila Rani D/o Jagdish Chander, Aged About 29 Years, House
No.50, B Block (Gurudwara Ke Samne), Sri Vijaynagar, District
Sri Ganganagar (Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department Of
Secondary Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
2. Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner.
3. The Joint Director, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pawan Vishnoi
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
26/10/2021
In the wake of second surge in the COVID-19 cases, the
Court is functioning virtually and abundant caution is being
maintained for the safety of all concerned.
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
(2 of 4) [CW-15104/2021]
case of Manoj Khandelwal (supra) and Krishan Lal (supra) claims
learned counsel.
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.
(3 of 4) [CW-15104/2021]
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
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
(4 of 4) [CW-15104/2021]
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.
(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J
369-nirmala/Sanjay-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
