Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Devi Choudhary vs State Of Rajasthan on 28 October, 2021
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15053/2021
Devi Choudhary S/o Amra Ram Choudhary, Aged About 38
Years, 28/175 Neharu Nagar, Barmer, At Presently Working At
Government Senior Secondary School Ranigaon, District Barmer.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
2. The Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner, District
Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission,
Ajmer, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Surendra Bagmalani
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
28/10/2021
In wake of second surge in the COVID-19 cases, abundant
caution is being maintained, while hearing the matters in Court,
for the safety of all concerned.
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
Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B.C.W.P. No. 7283/2014, decided on
16.07.2014 at Jaipur Bench and the said judgment has been
(Downloaded on 28/10/2021 at 09:41:07 PM)
(2 of 3) [CW-15053/2021]
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 petitioners are 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
(Downloaded on 28/10/2021 at 09:41:07 PM)
(3 of 3) [CW-15053/2021]
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."
(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J.
46-SKant/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
