Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Tajeng vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 20 April, 2023

Bench: Dinesh Mehta

[2023/RJJD/011009]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR (1) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 595/2021

Rajesh Kumar Damor S/o Sh. Keshav Lal Damor, Aged About 33 Years, Resident Of Village Kumhariya Post Barjadiya, Tehsil Anandpuri, District Banswara.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Director, Secondary Education, Bikaner.

2. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Jaipur, Agricultural Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur Through Its Chairperson.

3. District Education Officer, Headquarter Secondary Education, Barmer.

----Respondents Connected With (2) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 698/2021 Subhash Chandra Huvor S/o Sh. Bhurji Huvor, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village Sogpura, Post Naugama, Tehsil Bagidora, District Banswara.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Director, Elementary Education Bikaner.

2. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Jaipur, Agricultural Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur, Through Its Chairperson.

3. District Education Officer, Headquarter Secondary Education, Barmer.

----Respondents (3) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 710/2021 Vijendra Kumar Dodiyar S/o Devchand Dodiyar, Aged About 34 Years, Vpo Chandanwara, Village Naraniya, Tehsil Anandpuri, District Banswara.

----Petitioner Versus

[2023/RJJD/011009] (2 of 7) [CW-595/2021]

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

2. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board Jaipur, Agriculture Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur Through Its Chairperson.

3. District Education Officer, Headquarter Secondary Education, Barmer.

----Respondents (4) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 730/2021 Tajeng S/o Sh. Madiya Dindor, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of Village Balawada, Tehsil Bigidora, District Banswara.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

2. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Jaipur, Agricultural Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur Through Its Chairperson.

3. District Education Officer, Headquarter Secondary Education, Barmer.

----Respondents (5) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 731/2021 Dhanpal Patel S/o Lalit Patel, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Bhaler Bhodar, Anandpuri, District Banswara.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

2. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Jaipur, Agricultural Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur Through Its Chairperson.

3. District Education Officer, Headquarter Secondary Education, Barmer.

----Respondents (6) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 767/2021 Ram Chandra Katara S/o Kamji Katara, Aged About 40 Years,

[2023/RJJD/011009] (3 of 7) [CW-595/2021]

Vpo Biladi, Tehsil Arthuna, District Banswara.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

2. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board Jaipur, Agriculture Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur Through Its Chairperson.

3. District Education Officer, Headquarter Secondary Education, Barmer.

----Respondents (7) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 769/2021 Rajendra Kumar S/o Premji, Aged About 39 Years, Village Bheelkua, Tehsil Sajjangarh, District Banswara.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

2. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board Jaipur, Agriculture Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur Through Its Chairperson.

3. District Education Officer, Headquarter Secondary Education, Barmer.

----Respondents (8) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 814/2021 Sukh Ram Dodiyar S/o Sh. Dev Chand Dodiyar, Aged About 44 Years, Resident Of Village Naraniya, Post Chandarwara, Tehsil Anandpuri, District Banswara.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

2. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Jaipur, Agricultural Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur Through Its Chairperson.

3. District Education Officer, Headquarter Secondary

[2023/RJJD/011009] (4 of 7) [CW-595/2021]

Education, Barmer.

----Respondents (9) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1050/2021 Kamal Singh S/o Sh. Kalu Kamol, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Timba Mahudi Post Tambesara, Tehsil Sajjangarh, District Banswara.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.

2. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Jaipur, Agricultural Management Institute Premises, Durgapura, Jaipur Through Its Chairperson.

3. District Education Officer, Headquarter Secondary Education, Barmer.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. C.S.Kotwani with Mr. Kanishk Singhvi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vinit Sanadhya Mr. Srawan Kumar Mr. Rakesh Arora Mr. Naresh Singh

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Order

20/04/2023

1. In some of these writ petitions, applications are filed for

seeking amendment of the cause title.

2. For the reason stated, the applications in all these cases are

allowed.

3. The petitioners being resident of TSP areas applied for the

post of Physical Training Inspector Grade - III pursuant to

recruitment notification dated 04.05.2018.

[2023/RJJD/011009] (5 of 7) [CW-595/2021]

4. At the first instance of issuance of select list, petitioners

could not secure merit in the TSP area, however, being S.T.

candidates, appointments were available to them in Non-TSP area

which the Staff Selection Board offered.

5. The petitioners have been offered such appointment orders

and accepted the above referred appointments and joined at their

respective places where they were given appointments.

6. Subsequent thereto, cut - off of TSP area got lowered and

petitioners' marks became higher than the corresponding cut - off.

7. Petitioners have approached this Court with a grievance that

they secured more marks than cut - off of their respective

categories of TSP area and they should be given appointment in

TSP area.

8. Mr. Vinit Sanadhya, learned counsel appearing for the Staff

Selection Board submitted that petitioners were given

appointments in Non-TSP areas as they secured merit in Non-TSP

area.

9. He submitted that at the time of offering appointments, cut -

off of their category was higher and therefore, the petitioners

having merely joined the services in Non-TSP area cannot claim

their appointments in TSP area.

10. So far as petitioners' contention on merit is concerned that

they should be given appointment in TSP area is concerned, the

same cannot be accepted.

11. The reason is not far to seek at the time when petitioners

were offered appointment in Non-TSP area, cut - off of their

[2023/RJJD/011009] (6 of 7) [CW-595/2021]

category in TSP area was higher and hence, the petitioners were

accommodated in Non-TSP area.

12. Petitioners having joined pursuant to such appointment

orders cannot take a U-turn and claim that they may be given

appointments in TSP area.

13. Be that as it may.

14. The petitioners' rights of being posted in TSP area are in any

case protected by Rule 31 of the Rajasthan Scheduled Areas

Subordinate, Ministerial And Class-IV Service (Recruitment And

Other Service Conditions) Rules, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as

'Rules of 2014').

15. A Jaipur Bench of this Court while deciding writ petition in

the case of Nilesh Kumar Jain & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan

& Anr. : S. B. Civil Writ Petition No.12691/2017 decided on

20.12.2019 had issued following directions:-

"11. Keeping in view the mandate of Rule 31 of the Rules of 2014, it is now directed that the State Government shall post the petitioners who are from TSP area only in accordance of Rule 31 in the TSP area and the petitioners will continue to have their status of being of TSP category.

12. These writ petitions accordingly stand allowed. The exercise for posting the petitioners in TSP area shall be conducted within a period of 3 months."

.....

16. The said view of the learned Single Judge has been affirmed

by the Division Bench vide its order dated 20.11.2021 in the

appeal that was filed against judgment in the case of Nilesh

Kumar Jain.

[2023/RJJD/011009] (7 of 7) [CW-595/2021]

17. In view of the mandate of Rule 31 of the Rules of 2014, it is

hereby directed that the respondents shall try to

accommodate/transfer the present petitioners to TSP area.

18. It will be required of the petitioners to furnish their optional

form if not already furnished or to file a representation indicating

district of the TSP area in which they wish to be transferred.