Laxman Lal Patel vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:41574)
2023 Latest Caselaw 10249 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Laxman Lal Patel vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:41574) on 1 December, 2023

Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

[2023:RJ-JD:41574]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12230/2020

Ramesh Chandra Ninama S/o Shri Jagmal, Aged About 41 Years,
R/o    Village       Post     Bhaler       Bhodar         Tehsil    Anandpuri       District
Banswara.
                                                                             ----Petitioner
                                           Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary,
         Department             Of     Elementary           Education         Government
         Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2.       Secretary,          Rural      Development            And        Panchayati    Raj
         Department            Government            Of     Rajasthan,        Secretariat,
         Jaipur.
3.       Director, (Elementary Education), Bikaner
4.       Joint       Director         (Personnel),          Elementary         Education,
         Rajasthan, Bikaner.
5.       District      Education            Officer       (Elementary         Education),
         Banswara.
6.       District      Education            Officer        (Secondary         Education),
         Banswara.
7.       Chief       Block       Elementary           Officer,          Panchayat   Samiti
         Gangadtalai District Banswara.
8.       Panchayat           Elementary            Officer,        Government       Senior
         Secondary School Gamania Hameera, Gram Panchayat
         Gamania        Hameera            Panchayat          Samiti       Ghatol   District
         Banswara.
                                                                          ----Respondents
                                     Connected With
                 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12098/2020
1.       Bapu Lal Rana S/o Shri Dalji Rana, Aged About 44 Years,
         By Caste Rana, R/o Vadela Pada, Post And Tehsil Ghatol
         District Banswara.
2.       Naresh Kumar Ninama S/o Shri Laxminarayan, Aged
         About 44 Years, By Caste Ninama, R/o Mukam Post
         Ganoda, Tehsil Ghatol District Banswara.
3.       Heera Lal Katara S/o Shri Shri Nanakji Katara, Aged
         About 46 Years, By Caste Katara, R/o Hera Psot Kanji Ka


                            (Downloaded on 02/12/2023 at 08:39:24 PM)
 [2023:RJ-JD:41574]                       (2 of 9)                       [CW-12230/2020]


         Ghada Tehsil Ghatol District Banswara.
                                                                       ----Petitioners
                                        Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary,
         Department          Of     Elementary            Education     Government
         Secretariat, Rajasthan Jaipur.
2.       Secretary,       Rural      Development            And      Panchayati   Raj
         Department         Government              Of    Rajasthan,     Secretariat,
         Jaipur.
3.       Director, (Elementary Education), Bikaner.
4.       Joint       Director      (Personnel),           Elementary      Education,
         Rajasthan, Bikaner.
5.       District      Education         Officer         (Elementary     Education),
         Banswara.
6.       District      Education         Officer         (Secondary      Education),
         Banswara.
7.       Chief Block Elementary Officer, Panchayat Samiti Ghatol
         District Banswara.
8.       Panchayat        Elementary            Officer,      Government       Senior
         Secondary School Kanji Ka Gada, Gram Panchayat Kanji
         Ka Gada Panchayat Samiti Ghatol District Banswara.
                                                                     ----Respondents
                 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12739/2020
Indra Ninama D/o Shri Heera Lal Maida, Aged About 37 Years, R/
o Agarpura, Ward No. 16, Behind Sumanand Jain Temple, District
Banswara.
                                                                        ----Petitioner
                                        Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary,
         Department          Of     Elementary            Education,    Government
         Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2.       Secretary,       Rural      Development            And      Panchayati   Raj
         Department,         Government             Of    Rajasthan,     Secretariat,
         Jaipur.
3.       Director (Elementary Education), Bikaner.
4.       Joint       Director      (Personnel),           Elementary      Education,
         Rajasthan, Bikaner.

                         (Downloaded on 02/12/2023 at 08:39:24 PM)
 [2023:RJ-JD:41574]                       (3 of 9)                       [CW-12230/2020]


5.       The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Banswara,
         Rajasthan.
6.       District     Education         Officer,      Headquarter       (Elementary
         Education), Banswara.
7.       District      Education         Officer,        (Secondary      Education),
         Banswara.
                                                                     ----Respondents
                 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12794/2020
Laxman Lal Patel S/o Bhurji Patel, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Vill.
Lalawada Post Lilwani Tehsil Bagidora District Banswara.
                                                                        ----Petitioner
                                        Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary,
         Department          Of     Elementary           Education,     Government
         Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2.       Secretary,       Rural      Development            And      Panchayati   Raj
         Department,         Government             Of    Rajasthan,     Secretariat,
         Jaipur.
3.       Director (Elementary Education), Bikaner.
4.       Joint       Director,      (Personnel)          Elementary       Education,
         Rajasthan, Bikaner.
5.       The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Education,
         Rajasthan, Bikaner.
6.       District     Education         Officer,      Headquarter       (Elementary
         Education), Banswara.
7.       District      Education         Officer,        (Secondary      Education),
         Banswara.
                                                                     ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)             :     Mr. Ram Dev Potalia.
For Respondent(s)             :     Dr. Bhawna Jangid.



      HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Order

01/12/2023

[2023:RJ-JD:41574] (4 of 9) [CW-12230/2020]

1. Learned counsel for the parties submits that issue involved in

the present writ petition is no more res-integra as the same has

already been decided by a Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court

in Manoj Kumar Barjod & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

(S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12285/2020) decided on

13.09.2023, which reads as follows:-

"1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the orders dated 02.09.2020 and 24.09.2020 (Annexures-9 & 10, respectively), whereby the respondents have reviewed the earlier order by which actual / notional benefits were granted to the petitioners. By way of impugned order the recovery of the amount paid in excess has also been initiated.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not mislead or misrepresented and benefits which were granted to them by the respondent

- State was in accordance with law. It was submitted that the issue involved in the present writ petition has already been set at rest by the co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide its judgment dated 13.08.2019 in the case of Dal Chand Jat vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3063/2019.

3. Learned counsel submitted that the only difference in the case of Dal Chand Jat (supra) and the present case is that in the case of Dal Chand Jat (supra) the recruitment was of the year 2012-2013, whereas in petitioner's case the same pertains to year 2004.

4. Ms. Bhawna Jangid, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that an appeal has been preferred by the State against the judgment in the case of Dal Chand Jat (supra) and the same is pending consideration and therefore, the present writ petition be kept pending.

[2023:RJ-JD:41574] (5 of 9) [CW-12230/2020]

5. However, learned counsel for the respondents was not in a position to dispute the position of law, as has been settled by this Court in the case of Dal Chand Jat (supra).

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submissions made at the bar, this Court is of the view that no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending, particularly when an interim order has been passed in petitioners' favour by this Court on 03.03.2021.

7. In the case of Dal Chand Jat (supra), this Court has held thus:

"After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing record of the case, this Court finds that the purport of the case law mentioned above are that the petitioners, who were equally entitled and eligible to be appointed on the post of Teacher Gr.-III where out of advertisement of 2012-2013 at level I and level II for various subjects are to be treated at par with each other. The discrimination on account of joining duties due to various bone of contentions relating to eligibility and qualifications have been nullified by aforesaid judgments, including in the case of Hemlata Shrimali (supra) and since all the candidates who are now found eligible and as per existing case law and the judgments of the Apex Court, they have to be treated at par with each other. There cannot be any doubt regarding expressions made by this Court in the previous litigation that these all the petitioners who stand in merit and who have qualified 2012-2013 recruitment for the post of Teacher Grade-III would be entitled for the notional benefits for the purpose including pay fixation and seniority from the date their equivalent or lesser merit person in that phase of recruitment was given such benefits. This Court also finds that focal averment raised by the respondents that no monetary benefits can be accorded to the petitioners for the period when they were not actually discharging services, is also a consistently answered in the precedent of law laid down by this Court. Thus, taking strength from

[2023:RJ-JD:41574] (6 of 9) [CW-12230/2020]

the same precedent of law as cited by counsel for the parties, these petitions are disposed off with a direction to the respondents that petitioners shall be paid the notional benefits, including benefits of seniority and pay fixation from the stage when the appointment of persons at the same or lesser merit were appointed. However, no monetary benefits where the petitioners not having discharged actual services would be payable. Needless to say that any notional fixation or any notional benefits which has resulted into current payment and current position where the petitioners are discharging their services, shall not be recovered and shall be continued to be paid.

In view of the aforesaid, it is directed that no recovery in line with the aforesaid observations be made from the petitioners."

8. In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed.

9. The impugned orders dated 02.09.2020 and 24.09.2020 (Annexures-9 & 10, respectively) are quashed and set aside qua the petitioners.

10. Stay application also stands disposed of, accordingly."

2. In view of the aforesaid, the present writ petition is allowed

and the impugned orders dated 02.09.2020 (Annex.4) &

24.09.2020 (Annex.5) are quashed and set aside qua the

petitioners.

3. All pending applications, if any, also stands disposed of.

In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12098/2020 :-

1. Learned counsel for the parties submits that issue involved in

the present writ petition is no more res-integra as the same has

already been decided by a Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court

in Manoj Kumar Barjod & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

[2023:RJ-JD:41574] (7 of 9) [CW-12230/2020]

(S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12285/2020) decided on

13.09.2023, which reads as follows:-

"1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the orders dated 02.09.2020 and 24.09.2020 (Annexures-9 & 10, respectively), whereby the respondents have reviewed the earlier order by which actual / notional benefits were granted to the petitioners. By way of impugned order the recovery of the amount paid in excess has also been initiated.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not mislead or misrepresented and benefits which were granted to them by the respondent

- State was in accordance with law. It was submitted that the issue involved in the present writ petition has already been set at rest by the co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide its judgment dated 13.08.2019 in the case of Dal Chand Jat vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3063/2019.

3. Learned counsel submitted that the only difference in the case of Dal Chand Jat (supra) and the present case is that in the case of Dal Chand Jat (supra) the recruitment was of the year 2012-2013, whereas in petitioner's case the same pertains to year 2004.

4. Ms. Bhawna Jangid, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that an appeal has been preferred by the State against the judgment in the case of Dal Chand Jat (supra) and the same is pending consideration and therefore, the present writ petition be kept pending.

5. However, learned counsel for the respondents was not in a position to dispute the position of law, as has been settled by this Court in the case of Dal Chand Jat (supra).

[2023:RJ-JD:41574] (8 of 9) [CW-12230/2020]

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submissions made at the bar, this Court is of the view that no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending, particularly when an interim order has been passed in petitioners' favour by this Court on 03.03.2021.

7. In the case of Dal Chand Jat (supra), this Court has held thus:

"After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing record of the case, this Court finds that the purport of the case law mentioned above are that the petitioners, who were equally entitled and eligible to be appointed on the post of Teacher Gr.-III where out of advertisement of 2012-2013 at level I and level II for various subjects are to be treated at par with each other. The discrimination on account of joining duties due to various bone of contentions relating to eligibility and qualifications have been nullified by aforesaid judgments, including in the case of Hemlata Shrimali (supra) and since all the candidates who are now found eligible and as per existing case law and the judgments of the Apex Court, they have to be treated at par with each other. There cannot be any doubt regarding expressions made by this Court in the previous litigation that these all the petitioners who stand in merit and who have qualified 2012-2013 recruitment for the post of Teacher Grade-III would be entitled for the notional benefits for the purpose including pay fixation and seniority from the date their equivalent or lesser merit person in that phase of recruitment was given such benefits. This Court also finds that focal averment raised by the respondents that no monetary benefits can be accorded to the petitioners for the period when they were not actually discharging services, is also a consistently answered in the precedent of law laid down by this Court. Thus, taking strength from the same precedent of law as cited by counsel for the parties, these petitions are disposed off with a direction to the respondents that petitioners shall be paid the notional benefits, including benefits of seniority and pay fixation from the stage when the

[2023:RJ-JD:41574] (9 of 9) [CW-12230/2020]

appointment of persons at the same or lesser merit were appointed. However, no monetary benefits where the petitioners not having discharged actual services would be payable. Needless to say that any notional fixation or any notional benefits which has resulted into current payment and current position where the petitioners are discharging their services, shall not be recovered and shall be continued to be paid.

In view of the aforesaid, it is directed that no recovery in line with the aforesaid observations be made from the petitioners."

8. In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed.

9. The impugned orders dated 02.09.2020 and 24.09.2020 (Annexures-9 & 10, respectively) are quashed and set aside qua the petitioners.

10. Stay application also stands disposed of, accordingly."

2. In view of the aforesaid, the present writ petition is allowed

and the impugned order dated 16.10.2020 (Annex.9) are quashed

and set aside qua the petitioners.

3. All pending applications, if any, also stands disposed of.

(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.

191-194-Jitender

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)