Jitendra Kumar Jeengar vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 1317 Raj

[2023/RJJD/003779]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19111/2022

1. Jitendra Kumar Jeengar S/o Shri Mahendra Kumar Jeengar, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Block Number 3 Quarter Number H-13, Reserve Police Bhilwara (Raj)

2. Phusa Ram S/o Shri Jagdish Ram, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village 5 Sgr Post Likhmisar, Tehsil Pilibanga, District Hanumangarh (Raj.)

3. Rajendra Poonia S/o Shri Shishram Poonia, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village And Post Nabipura Via Beswa Tehsil Fatehpur District Sikar (Raj)

4. Rakesh Kumar Bairwa S/o Shri Banwari Lal Bairwa, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village Mahukhurd Post Mahukhera Tehsil Baswa Distt. Dausa (Raj.)

5. Praveen Kumar Meena S/o Shri Prabhu Dayal Meena, Aged About 27 Years, Village And Post Devkaharwara Tehsil Aamer District Jaipur (Raj)

6. Jaswant Kumar S/o Shri Radheshyam, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village And Post Devta, Tehsil Kotputli District Jaipur (Raj.)

7. Praveen Kumar S/o Shri Ratan Lal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Dayalpur Post Kishangarh Bas, Tehsil Kishangarh Bas District Alwar (Raj.)

----Petitioners Versus

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

2. Director General Of Police, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

3. Inspector General Of Police (Ajmer Range), Ajmer (Rajasthan).

4. Superintendent Of Police, Bhilwara (Raj.)

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Jhajharia through VC

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Order

03/02/2023

1. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that the

issue raised in the present writ petition is covered by the

judgment rendered in the case of Dara Singh v. State of

[2023/RJJD/003779] (2 of 2) [CW-19111/2022]

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 that 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."

3. In view of the submissions made, the writ petition filed by

the petitioners is disposed of with similar directions as given in the

case of Dara Singh (supra).

4. Stay petition also stands disposed of.

(DINESH MEHTA),J 62-Arvind/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)