Krishna Kumari vs State Of Rajasthan
2023 Latest Caselaw 2901 Raj

[2023/RJJD/009697]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4685/2023

1. Krishna Kumari D/o Shri Chetan Ram, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Dhundhvalo Ki Aguni Dhania Post Alay, Tehsil Nagaur, District Nagaur (Rajasthan)

2. Lala Ram S/o Shri Sukh Dev Ram, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village And Post Janjeela, Tehsil Parbatsar District Nagaur (Rajasthan)

3. Kalu Ram Bairwa S/o Shri Madan Lal, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village And Post Peelwa Kalan , Tehsil Sikarai, District Dausa(Rajasthan)

4. Gajraj Singh Gurjar S/o Shri Ramchandra Gurjar, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village And Post Lanka, Tehsil Bharawanda, District Dausa (Rajasthan)

5. Ravi Kumar Jangid S/o Shri Girraj Prasad Jangid, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Malagwas Post Khuri Kalan, Tehsil Dausa, District Dausa (Rajasthan)

6. Rakesh Kumar Gurjar S/o Shri Man Singh Gurjar, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Nayabas Post Gudhachandraji, Tehsil Nadoti, District Karauli (Rajasthan)

7. Duli Chana Koli S/o Shri Banwari Lal Koli, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village And Post Tehla , Tehsil Rajgarh District Alwar (Rajasthan)

8. Kinnu Singh Gurjar S/o Shri Umed Singh Gurjar, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village Nayagaon Post Dhanawar ,tehsil Baswa District Dausa (Rajasthan)

9. Kamal Singh Gurjar S/o Shri Raghuveer Singh Gurjar, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village Dangda Post Gadarwada Gujran ,tehsil Baswa District Dausa(Rajasthan)

10. Mahendra Kumar Gurjar S/o Shri Vinod Kumar Gurjar, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village And Post Kableshwar Tehsil Dausa, District Dausa (Rajasthan)

11. Ravi Shankar Saini S/o Shri Laxman Saini, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Ward No. 39 Jageer Bandikui (Dausa) , District Dausa (Rajasthan)

12. Sanjay Kumar Jangid S/o Shri Murari Lal Jangid, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village Malagwas Post Khuri Kalan, Tehsil Dausa District Dausa (Rajasthan)

[2023/RJJD/009697] (2 of 4) [CW-4685/2023]

13. Rajendra Prasad Gurjar S/o Shri Ram Narayan Gurjar, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village And Post Sodala Tehsil Baswa , District Dausa (Rajasthan)

14. Vishram Bairwa S/o Shri Madan Lal Bairwa, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village Malagwas Post Khuri Kalan, Tehsil And District Dausa (Rajasthan)

15. Sunil Kumar S/o Shri Duli Chand, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village Lodipura Post Padampura, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu (Rajasthan)

16. Dhara Singh Gurjar S/o Shri Birdi Chand Gurjar, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village Goojarwada Post Shekhpura, Tehsil Sikndra, District Dausa (Rajasthan)

17. Rajesh Kumar Tanwar S/o Shri Mohan Lal Tanwar, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village And Post Kundera Doongar , Tehsil Sikrai, District Dausa (Raj.)

18. Vinod Kumar Saini S/o Shri Ramkesh Saini, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village Maheshpura Post Jairampura, Tehsil Aamer District Jaipur(Rajasthan)

19. Susheel Kumar Bairwa S/o Shri Rameshwar Bairwa, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village Kishanpura Post Nandera Tehsil Baswa Distt. Dausa (Raj.)

20. Ummed Singh Gurjar S/o Shri Nathu Lal Gurjar, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village Bhatpura Post Niloj Tehsil Baswa Distt. Dausa (Raj.)

21. Rinku Baindara S/o Shri Gokul Chand Baindara, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Bairwa Mohalla Chhoti Dausa Ward No. 42 Tehsil Dausa Distt. Dausa (Raj.)

22. Vinod Kumar Bairwa S/o Shri Ghasi Lal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Torda Post Salempura Tehsil Lalsot Distt. Dausa (Raj.)

23. Rinku Bairwa S/o Shri Ramdhan Bairwa, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Gugolaw(Malwasya Ki Dhani) Tehsil Lawan Distt. Dausa (Raj.)

24. Om Prakash Bairwa S/o Shri Babu Lal Bairwa, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village And Post Muhi Tehsil Baswa Distt. Dausa (Raj.)

25. Kaushlendra Singh S/o Shri Lakhan Singh, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village And Post Madhapura Tehsil Roopbash Distt. Bharatpur (Raj.)

[2023/RJJD/009697] (3 of 4) [CW-4685/2023]

26. Sanjay Yadav S/o Shri Girraj Prasad Yadav, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village And Post Chawandeda Tehsil Dausa Distt. Dausa (Raj.)

27. Narsi Ram Buri S/o Shri Hanuman Sahay, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village Sherawatpura Post Mundota Tehsil Aamer Distt. Jaipur (Raj.)

28. Deevan Singh S/o Shri Devi Singh Solanki, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village Akolashi Post Jatnagala Tehsil Hindaun City Distt. Karauli (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 (Ajmer Range), Ajmer, (Rajasthan.)

4. Inspector General Of Police (Jaipur Range), Jaipur, (Rajasthan.)

5. Superintendent Of Police, Bhilwara (Raj)

6. Superintendent Of Police, Dausa (Raj)

----Respondents

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

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

12/04/2023

1. 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.

2. In the case of Dara Singh (supra), a coordinate Bench of this

Court, inter alia, directed as under:

[2023/RJJD/009697] (4 of 4) [CW-4685/2023]

"Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that realizing the mistake, appointment has been given, thus, grievance of petitioner to the 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 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."

3. In view of the submissions made, the writ petition filed by

the petitioners is disposed of with similar directions to the

respondents No.3 & 4 as given in the case of Dara Singh (supra).

4. 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

petitioners would be entitled to the relief.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 113-Shahenshah/11.04/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)