Manish Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 624 Raj

(1 of 5) [CW-418/2022]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 418/2022

1. Manish Kumar S/o Shri Rajender Kumar, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village And Post Sardarpura Bika, Tehsil Suratgarh, District Sriganganagar (Rajasthan).

2. Rajendra Kumar S/o Shri Devilal, Aged About 27 Years, R/ o Village And Post Bhopalpura, Tehsil Suratgarh District Sriganganagar (Rajasthan).

3. Santram S/o Shri Sahiram, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village And Post 36 Lnp, Tehsil Padampur, District Sriganganagar (Rajasthan).

4. Rakesh Kumar S/o Shri Ramlal, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Chak 9 Spm, Tehsil Sadulshahaar, District Sriganganagar (Rajasthan).

5. Anil Kumar S/o Shri Rohitash, Aged About 26 Years, R/o 51 Lnp, Tehsil Padampur, District Sriganganagar (Rajasthan).

6. Kalu Ram Sohu S/o Shri Kana Ram Sohu, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village And Post Chandni, Tehsil Degana, District Nagaur (Rajasthan).

7. Happy S/o Shri Budhram, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Ward No. 12 Raisinghnagar, Tehsil Raisinghnagar, District Sriganganagar (Rajasthan).

8. Narendra Singh D/o Shri Balram Singh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village And Post Newada, Tehsil Bhushawar District Bharatpur (Rajasthan).

9. Sandeep S/o Shri Om Prakash, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village And Post Dholipal, Tehsil Hanumangarh, District Hanumangarh (Rajasthan).

10. Kailash Verma S/o Shri Ranjeet Kumar, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village And Post Beenjhbayala Tehsil Padampur, District Sriganganagar (Rajasthan).

11. Bajrang Lal Trad S/o Shri Kana Ram, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village And Post Thawariya, Tehsil Nokha, District Bikaner (Rajasthan).

12. Hanuman Singh S/o Shri Ramkumar, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village And Post Lalana Bas Nathwaniya, Tehsil Nohar District Hanumangarh (Rajasthan).

(2 of 5) [CW-418/2022]

13. Rakesh Kumar S/o Shri Hiralal, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village And Post Ramjiwala, Tehsil Raisinghnagar, District Sriganganagar (Rajasthan).

14. Sunil Kumar S/o Shri Jagdeesh Parsad, Aged About 31 Years, R/o 12 Tk, Tehsil Raisinghnagar, District Sriganganagar (Rajasthan).

15. Ravi Prakash S/o Shri Dhanaram, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village And Post Jatan, Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh (Rajasthan).

16. Vinod Kumar S/o Shri Sahabram, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village And Post Kikarwali, Tehsil Raisinghnagar, District Hanumangarh (Rajasthan).

17. Neki Ram S/o Shri Hukma Ram, Aged About 29 Years, R/ o Village And Post Rampura Nyola (Chak 1 Rm), Tehsil Suratgarh, District Sriganganagar (Raj.)

18. Sitaram D/o Shri Udaybhan, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Chak 5 Apm (A) P.o 90 Gm, Tehsil Anupgarh, District Sriganganagar (Rajasthan).

19. Rajesh Kumar Gurjar S/o Shri Ramavatar Gurjar, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village Napawali, Post Dunga Ki Nangal, Tehsil Neemkathana, District Sikar (Rajasthan).

20. Sudheer Khati S/o Shri Gugan Ram Khati, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village And Post Badbirana, Tehsil Nohar, Distt. Hanumangarh (Raj.).

21. Suresh Kumar S/o Shri Mukhram, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village And Post Khothanwali Tehsil Pilibanga Distt. Hanumangarh (Raj.)

22. Pawan Kumar S/o Shri Jagdish Kumar, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village Jottawali Post Lohgarh Tehsil Mandi Dabwali Distt. Sirsa (Haryana).

23. Vikas S/o Mahesh Kumar, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village And Post Rawatsar Tehsil Ratwatsar Distt. Hanumangarh (Raj.)

24. Daleep Kumar S/o Shri Phusaram, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village And Post Chohilanwali, Tehsil Hanumangarh Distt. Hanumangarh (Raj.).

25. Pramod Kumar S/o Shri Ram Sawroop, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Chak 1Ppm P.o Jankidaswala Tehsil Suratgarh Distt. Sriganganagar (Raj.)

26. Rakesh Kaswan S/o Shri Bajrang Lal Kaswan, Aged About

(3 of 5) [CW-418/2022]

29 Years, R/o Village And Post Bolanwali Tehsil Sangria Distt. Hanumangarh (Raj.).

27. Ashawani Kumar S/o Shri Bhoop Singh, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village And Post Lakhasar Tehsil Pilibangan Distt. Hanumangarh (Raj.).

28. Rakesh Kumar S/o Shri Rampartap, Aged About 29 Years, R/o 1Udm Village And Post Kamraniya Tehsil Anoopgarh Distt. Sriganganagar (Raj.).

29. Bhanu Pratap S/o Shri Manohar Lal, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village And Post Beenjhbayal Tehsil Padampur Distt. Sriganganagar (Raj.).

30. Pardeep Kumar S/o Shri Ganga Lal, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village And Post Shamsukh Tehsil Hisar Distt. Hisar (Haryana).

31. Rakesh Kumar S/o Shri Rameshwar Lal, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village And Post Jorawarpura Tehsil Hanumangarh (Raj.).

32. Ashok Kumar S/o Shri Omprakash, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village And Post Likhmisar Tehsil Pilibanga Distt. Hanumangarh (Raj.).

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Home Secretary, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.).

2. Director General Of Police, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

3. Inspector General Of Police, (Bikaner Range), Bikaner, (Rajasthan).

4. Superintendent Of Police, Shri Ganganagar, (Raj.).

                                                                   ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr. Vinod Jhajharia on VC
For Respondent(s)          :

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Order

12/01/2022

(4 of 5) [CW-418/2022]

In wake of instant surge in COVID-19 cases and spread of its

highly infectious Omicron variant, lawyers have been advised to

refrain from coming to the Courts.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn attention of

this Court towards the judgment passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of

this Court in Ramdayal Tard Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors

(SBCWP No.17254/2021) decided on 14.12.2021 and learned

counsel for the petitioner seeks disposal in the same terms. The

order dated 14.12.2021 reads as follows:-

"Counsel for the petitioners confines the petition to grant of notional increment and submits that the petitioners are not pressing the relief pertaining to seniority, inasmuch as proper seniority has already been assigned to the petitioners.

It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that the issue raised in the present writ petition is covered by the judgment in Dara Singh v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11973/2012, decided on 17.12.2012.

In the case of Dara Singh (supra), a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, inter-alia, directed as under :-

"Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that realizing the mistake, appointment has been given, thus, grievance of petitioner to that extent is redressed, but appointment should have been made effective from the date candidates lesser in merit were given appointment with notional benefits.

In view of the prayer made and taking note of the order dated 13.12.2012 whereby petitioner is given appointment realizing mistake by the respondents, I consider it proper to direct that aforesaid appointment should be treated from the date when lesser meritorious candidates

(5 of 5) [CW-418/2022]

were given. The petitioner would, accordingly, be entitled to the notional benefits and seniority from the date persons with less merit were given appointment. The actual benefits would be allowed from the date of joining pursuant to the order dated 13.12.2012. With the aforesaid, writ petition stands disposed of." In view of the submissions made, the writ petition filed by the petitioners is disposed of with similar directions as given in the case of Dara Singh (supra)."

In view of the above, the writ petition filed by the petitioners

is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the

representation of the petitioner, while keeping into consideration

the aforequoted order, by passing a speaking order within a period

of thirty days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this

order

All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly.

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J.

60-Sudheer/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)