Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Omprakash Bishnoi vs State Of Rajasthan on 24 August, 2022
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR.
.....
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11936/2022.
1. Omprakash Bishnoi S/o Pokra Ram, Aged About 45 Years,
R/o Vishnu Nagar, Bawarla Jalore, District Jalore,
Rajasthan.
2. Liyakat Khan S/o Daud Khan, Aged About 37 Years, R/o
Tekar Vaas Khara Kua Colony, Ward No 10, Bhinmal,
District Jalore, Rajasthan.
3. Gain Singh Vida S/o Bhagwan Singh, Aged About 42
Years, R/o Vidasar, Agor, Barmer, District Barmer,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Medical And
Family Welfare Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The Director (Non Gazzeted), Medical And Health Service,
Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
3. The Additional Director (Administration), Medical And
Family Welfare Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
4. The Superintendent, M.d.m. Hospital, Jodhpur (Raj.).
5. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Jalore (Raj.).
6. The Superintendent, District Hospital, Government
Ayurvigyan Mahavidhalya, Barmer.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikram Singh Bhawla.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vishal Jangid on behalf of
Mr. Hemant Choudhary, Govt. Counsel
(2 of 3) [CW-11936/2022]
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
24/08/2022
This writ petition has been filed by petitioners seeking reliefs
as indicated in the writ petition.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners 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, 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.
(3 of 3) [CW-11936/2022]
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."
The order has been passed based on the submissions made
in the petition, the respondents would be free to examine the
veracity of the submissions made in the petition and only in case,
the averments made therein are found to be correct, the
petitioner would be entitled to the relief.
Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of and the stay
petition also stands disposed of.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
255-Mohan/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
