Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Mahaveer Prasad vs State Of Rajasthan on 14 January, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 762/2022
Mahaveer Prasad S/o Jagdish Prasad, Aged About 53 Years, Vpo
Raipur Jageer, Via Ajitgarh, District Sikar, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principle Secretary
Department Of Personnel And Training Government
Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Deputy Secretary, Department Of Administrative
Reforms (Group-3), Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary,
Revenue Department, Government Of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur.
4. The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
5. The District Education Officer, Secondary-I, Sikar.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. RP Saini, on VC
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
14/01/2022
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.
Counsel for the petitioner 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.
(2 of 3) [CW-762/2022]
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 reads 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 making,
addressing the grievance of the petitioners for extending them
(3 of 3) [CW-762/2022]
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 petitioner 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 petitioner 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
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
117-Sanjay/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
