Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Suresh Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:44978) on 21 December, 2023
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2023:RJ-JD:44978]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19744/2023
Suresh Kumar S/o Shri Hari Ram, Aged About 34 Years, Resident
Of Near Pwd House, Ward No. 28 Nohar, Hanumangarh, Dist.
Hanumangarh. At Present Posted At Mahatma Gandhi Govt.
School, Ward No. 03, Rawatsar, Dist. Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, School
Education Department And Language And Library
Department And Panchayati Raj (Elementary Education)
Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The Director, Secondary Education Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The Joint Director, School Education, Bikaner Division,
Bikaner.
4. The District Education Officer (Headquarter), Secondary
Education, Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
5. The Principal, Mahatma Gandhi Government School
(492328) Ward No. 03, Rawatsar, Dist. Hanumangarh,
Udise Code - 08020415301.
6. The Principal, Mahatma Gandhi Government School
(464108) Bikarli, Dist. Hanumangarh.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.S.K.Shrimali.
For Respondent(s) : Mr.Vishal Jangid.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
ORDER
21/12/2023
Learned counsel for the parties jointly submitted that the
present controversy is covered by the judgment rendered by this
Court on 20.10.2023 in a batch of writ petitions led by S.B. Civil
Writ Petition No.16275/2023 (Vikram Singh & Anr. Vs. State of
[2023:RJ-JD:44978] (2 of 3) [CW-19744/2023]
Rajasthan & Ors.). The operative portion of the order passed in
the case of Vikram Singh (supra) is reproduced hereinbelow for
ready reference:
"16. In the present case, even if it is accepted that the
intention to provide for restriction to some extent, may be
justified, for the reasons indicated by the counsel for the
respondents and noticed hereinbefore, it was necessary for the
respondents to have first formulate the instructions in terms of
Rule 10 and thereafter issue an advertisement. Once, no such
restriction was imposed in the advertisement and the petitioners
applied pursuant to the advertisement(s), were subjected to
written test, stood in the merit and were issued orders of
appointment, but placing restriction of not relieving them, the
same clearly amounts to changing the rules of game after the
game is over.
17. It would be noticed that the advertisement was issued
on 17.06.2023 and the directions issued on the said date i.e.
17.06.2023 (Annex.R/3) only provided that the incumbents of the
Department would be eligible and no ineligibility worth the name
was indicated qua those already working in Mahatma Gandhi
Government (English Medium) Schools. The written test was held
in the month of August, 2023 and whereafter the result was
declared and it is only after the declaration of the result, just prior
to issuance of the orders of appointment that further directions
dated 24.09.2023 (Annex.R/4) placing the restriction, noticed
hereinbefore, was introduced, which was already too late and as
such the restriction imposed in the orders of appointment, based
on the said instructions, cannot be sustained.
18. In case the respondents wanted to enforce the said
restriction, they were required to clearly indicate the said
restriction in the advertisement itself so that those who were
already working at English medium schools, did not apply
pursuant to the advertisement and subject themselves to the
recruitment process and at the end of the recruitment process,
were not faced with the situation as the present petitioners have
been made to face.
19. Consequently, the writ petitions filed by the petitioners are
allowed. Clause (11) indicated in the orders of appointment
restricting the relieving the petitioners, is quashed and set aside.
The respondents are directed to relieve the petitioners from their
[2023:RJ-JD:44978] (3 of 3) [CW-19744/2023]
present positions and permit them to join at the place(s) where
they have been provided appointment by the said orders."
In view of aforesaid joint submission made by the learned
counsel for the parties at Bar, the present writ petition filed by the
petitioner is allowed. The respondents are directed to relieve the
petitioner from his present position and permit him to join at the
place where he has been provided appointment vide office order
dated 2.10.2023 issued by the Office of Joint Director, School
Education, Bikaner Division, Bikaner.
All pending applications if any are disposed of.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
/tarun goyal/
Sr.No.623
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
