Ram Lal vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 6545 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:27463]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12774/2023

1. Ram Lal S/o Khangara Ram, Aged About 36 Years, Belt No. 496 Bharti Dist. Jaisalmer Add. V/p Karadwari The, Sanchor, Dist. Jalore.

2. Jorawar Singh S/o Gemar Singh, Aged About 33 Years, Belt No. 137 Bharti Dist. Jaisalmer Add. V/p Badora Gaon The. Jaisalmer Dist. Jaisalmer.

3. Vinod Kumar S/o Puran Ram Godara, Aged About 32 Years, Belt No. 379 Bharti Dist. Jaisalmer Add. Pwd Colony Anupgarh Dist. Sri Ganganagar.

4. Gajendra Singh S/o Achchhe Lal, Aged About 34 Years, Belt No. 303 Bharti Dist Jaisalmer Add. Aou Gate Deeg Dist. Bharatpur.

5. Purkha Ram S/o Sirdara Ram, Aged About 34 Years, Belt No. 304 Bharti Dist Jaisalmer Add. V/p Kumpliya The. Gira Dist. Barmer.

----Petitioners Versus

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

2. The Director General Of Police, Police Headquarter, Jaipur.

3. Inspector General Of Police, Jaipur Range, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

4. The Superintendent Of Police, Jaisalmer.

                                                                     ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)              :    Mr. Akash Goyal
For Respondent(s)              :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

29/08/2023

It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that the

issue raised in the present writ petition is covered by the

[2023:RJ-JD:27463] (2 of 2) [CW-12774/2023]

judgment in Dara Singh v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B.Civil

Writ Petition No.11973/2012, decided on 17.12.2012.

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 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."

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).

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 332-Shahenshah/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)