Durga Ram vs State Of Rajasthan
2023 Latest Caselaw 2932 Raj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 2932 Raj
Judgement Date : 12 April, 2023

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Durga Ram vs State Of Rajasthan on 12 April, 2023

Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur

[2023/RJJD/009698]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4687/2023

1. Durga Ram S/o Shri Pancha Ram, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village And Post Melana Bhopalgarh, Tehsil Bavdi, District Jodhpur (Rajasthan)

2. Firoj Khan S/o Shri Keshav Khan, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Aditya Mill Colony House No. F/o9 Post Madanganj, Tehsil Kishangarh District Ajmer (Rajasthan)

3. Mohan Lal Bairwa S/o Shri Ramphool, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village And Post Kaithuda Tehsil Nainwa Distt. Bundi (Raj.)

4. Ramkishan S/o Shri Janshi Lal, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Goth Post Morpa Tehsil Bamnawas Distt. Sawai Madhopur (Raj.)

5. Rohit Bagdiya S/o Shri Giridhari Lal, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village And Post Abhawas Tehsil Shrimadhopur Distt. Sikar (Raj.)

6. Vikash Panwar S/o Shri Ghanshyam Panwar, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village And Post Harigarh Tehsil Khanpur Distt. Jhalawar (Raj.)

7. Saroj D/o Shri Keshar, Dev W/o Shri Rajkumar, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village And Post Bhojana Johda Ke Pass Ki Dhaniya Bhairoopura Tehsil And Sikar (Raj.)

8. Suresh Sharma S/o Sitaram Sharma, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village Nayabas Tehsil And Post Jamwaramgarh Distt. Jaipur (Raj.)

9. Lokesh Kumar Meena S/o Shri Shyoraj Meena, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village Fatehganj Post Rupra Tehsil Uniyara Distt. Tonk (Raj.)

10. Sandeep Yadav S/o Shri Ram Lal Yadav, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village And Post Ladpura Tehsil Ladpura Distt. Kota (Raj.)

11. Lalit Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Ramesh Chand Yadav, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Vidya Colony Kota Road Baran Post Gajanpura Tehsil Baran Distt. Baran (Raj.)

12. Udai Pratap Singh S/o Shri Permsingh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village And Post Ibrahimpur Tehsil Bari Distt. Dholpur (Raj.)

[2023/RJJD/009698] (2 of 3) [CW-4687/2023]

13. Kailash Ram S/o Shri Guna Ram, Aged About 31 Years, R/ o Village And Post Khajwana Tehsil Mundwa Distt. Nagaur (Raj.)

14. Sunil Kumar Roj S/o Shri Bhoora Ram Roj, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village And Post Kishanpura Tehsil Chomu Distt. Jaipur (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 (Kota Range), Kota, (Rajasthan.)

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

5. Superintendent Of Police, Kota, (Raj.)

6. Superintendent Of Police, Jhalawar, (Raj.)

7. Superintendent Of Police, Ajmer, (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/009698] (3 of 3) [CW-4687/2023]

"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.