Kulvindra Singh vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 3574 Raj

[2023/RJJD/011990]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5566/2023

1. Kulvindra Singh S/o Shri Gurdeep Singh, Aged About 32 Years, R/o 7 F Post Mirjewala Thana Matilirathan, Tehsil Shri Ganganagar, District Shri Ganganagar (Rajasthan).

2. Kushal Kumar S/o Shri Satpal, Aged About 39 Years, R/o House No. 548 Gali No. 6 Ssb Road 3 E Police Than Jawaharnagar, Tehsil Shri Ganganagar, District Shri Ganganagar (Rajasthan).

3. Sandeep Kumar S/o Shri Surender Kumar, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village And Post Beenjhbayala, Tehsil Padampur, District Shri Ganganagar (Rajasthan).

4. Jai Prakash S/o Shri Khetpal, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village And Post Sanghar, Tehsil Suratgharh, District Shri Ganganagar (Rajasthan).

5. Mamraj S/o Shri Puranram, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Chak 10 Sdp Post Lalgarhjatan Tehsil Shri Ganganagar, District Shri Ganganagar (Rajasthan).

6. Rani Devi D/o Shri Rajendra Kumar, Aged About 30 Years, R/o 10 Sarkari Post Raghunathpura (8 Gb), Tehsil Vijay Nagar, District Shri Ganganagar (Rajasthan).

7. Chander Pal S/o Shri Uttam Chand, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village And Post Ratanpura, Tehsil Sangariya, District Hanumangarh (Rajasthan).

8. Sulendra Samota S/o Shri Jai Singh, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village Chobara Post Kirara Bara Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh (Rajasthan).

9. Vikash Kumar S/o Shri Dhunkalram, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Chak 10 Nd Vpo Nahrawali Tehsil Anupgarh, District Shri Ganganagar (Rajasthan).

10. Satpal S/o Shri Sohanlal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Chak 6 Rpm Post Jasana Tehsil Nohar, District Hanumangarh (Rajasthan).

11. Dharampal S/o Shri Madan Lal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Ward No. 11 Village And Post Jodkia Tehsil And Distt. Hanumangarh, (Rajasthan).

12. Satpal S/o Shri Ramchander, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village 17 S, Post 2 X, Tehsil Shri Ganganagar, District Shri Ganganagar (Rajasthan).

[2023/RJJD/011990] (2 of 3) [CW-5566/2023]

13. Suman Bishnoi D/o Shri Radheshyam, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village And Post Rawla Gaav (10 Kd), Tehsil Gharsana, District Shri Ganganagar (Rajasthan).

----Petitioners Versus

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

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, through VC
For Respondent(s)              :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

25/04/2023

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:

"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

[2023/RJJD/011990] (3 of 3) [CW-5566/2023]

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 106-Shahenshah/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)