Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Kanta vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 7 February, 2023
Bench: Arun Bhansali
[2023/RJJD/004302]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 807/2023
1. Kanta W/o Shri Pramod Kumar, Aged About 46 Years, R/o
Nenawato Ki Pole, Merta Nagaur.
2. Laxman Ram Mali S/o Shri Nenu Ram Mali, Aged About 46
Years, R/o Sooriyas, Nagaur.
3. Ramdev S/o Shri Pokar Ram, Aged About 46 Years, R/o
Meghwalo Ka Baas, Mankiyas, Tehsil Merta City, Nagaur.
4. Sohan Lal S/o Lachu Ram, Aged About 48 Years, R/o
Meghwalo Ka Mohalla, Narma Bhakhari Nagaur.
5. Kalu Ram S/o Roopa Ram, Aged About 44 Years, R/o
Jhunjhadiya Ki Dhani, Sathana Khurd, Nagaur.
6. Shiv Karan S/o Shri Nathu Ram, Aged About 44 Years, R/
o Bavariyo Ka Baas, Jajasani, Nagaur.
7. Taru Ram S/o Shri Binja Ram, Aged About 45 Years, R/o
Bhatiyo Ka Mohalla, Merta, Nagaur.
8. Dev Karan S/o Shri Mangu Ram, Aged About 48 Years, R/
o Kumaharo Ki Baas, Phakli, Mugadara, Nagaur.
9. Vinod S/o Shri Banshi Lal, Aged About 47 Years, R/o
Dudiyana, Nagaur.
10. Ajit Singh S/o Shri Karan Singh, Aged About 46 Years, R/
o Village Nathwari, Nagaur
11. Hari Prasad S/o Shri Jagdish Prasad, Aged About 46
Years, R/o Loharo Ka Baas, Rohishi, Rohisha, Nagaur.
12. Puranmal S/o Shri P. Prajapat, Aged About 46 Years, R/o
Kumawato Ka Mohalla, Govindgarh, Ajmer.
13. Ramniwas S/o Shri Arjun Ram, Aged About 50 Years, R/o
Jarau Kalan, Nagaur.
14. Kesha Ram S/o Shri Ramji Ram, Aged About 48 Years, R/
o Meghwal Ka Mohalla, Mathaniya, Dodiyana, Nagaur.
15. Ramchandra S/o Shri Sona Ram, Aged About 48 Years, R/
o Nala Ki Dhani, Dodiyana, Tehsil Riya Bari, Nagaur.
16. Babu Lal S/o Shri Jagdish Ram, Aged About 46 Years, R/o
Jhunjariyo Ki Dhani, Sathana Khurd, Nagaur.
17. Jagdish S/o Nimba Ram, Aged About 43 Years, R/o
Meghwalo Ka Mohalla, Jesas, Rohit, Lampoli, Nagaur.
18. Mahaveer Singh S/o Shri Chain Singh, Aged About 44
Years, R/o Nathawari, Nagaur
[2023/RJJD/004302] (2 of 4) [CW-807/2023]
19. Nemichand S/o Shri Chhitar Ram, Aged About 50 Years,
R/o Chawaro Ka Mohalla Riya Bari, Nagaur.
20. Smt. Saroj Tiwari W/o Shri Lalit Prasad, Aged About 46
Years, R/o New Colony, Borunda, Jodhpur
21. Kamal Kishore S/o Shri Mohan Lal, Aged About 45 Years,
R/o Riya Bari, Nagaur
22. Smt. Meenakshi W/o Anju Sharma, Aged About 44 Years,
R/o 17/30 Idsmt, Colony, Pushkar Rural, Ajmer.
23. Nema Ram S/o Shri Dhukal Ram, Aged About 45 Years,
R/o Kurdiya, Merta City, Nagaur.
24. Chota Ram S/o Shri Arjun Ram, Aged About 50 Years, R/o
Bamaniya Baas, Paduu Khurd, Nagaur.
25. Smt. Gaytri W/o Shri Surendra Kumar, Aged About 47
Years, R/o Joshi Mohalla, Borawar, Nagaur.
26. Mahaveer Prasad S/o Shri Pabu Ram, Aged About 45
Years, R/o Hospital Road, Riya Bari, Nagaur.
27. Om Prakash S/o Dayal Ram, Aged About 47 Years, R/o
Muniji Ka Badla, Riya Bari, Nagaur.
28. Gopal Sen S/o Shri Dhanraj Sen, Aged About 47 Years, R/
o Bajranggarh Colony, Riya Bari, Nagaur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
Department Of Education, Secretariate, Jaipur
2. The Director, Primary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The District Education Officer, Elementary Education,
Nagaur.
4. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Nagaur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jaamvant Gurjar.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI
Order
07/02/2023
This writ petition has been filed by petitioners seeking reliefs
as indicated in the writ petition.
[2023/RJJD/004302] (3 of 4) [CW-807/2023]
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the
issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by
judgment of this Court in Manoj Khandelwal & Ors. v. State of
Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B.C.W.P. No. 7283/2014, decided on
16.07.2014 at Jaipur Bench and the said judgment has been
followed in Krishan Lal & Ors. v. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. :
S.B.C.W.P. No. 19179/2017, decided on 30.10.2017 at Jaipur
Bench, and therefore, the petitioners are also entitled to the same
relief as granted in the case of Manoj Khandelwal (supra) and
Krishan Lal (supra).
In view of the submissions made, the writ petition filed by
the petitioners is disposed of with the similar directions as given in
the case of Manoj Khandelwal (supra), which read as under:-
"This Court in Suman Bai and Another Vs. State and
Others - 2009 (1) WLC (Raj.) 381, held that candidates in
lower order of merit cannot become entitled merely because
they had approached court earlier. Petitioners had a fresh
cause of action for approaching in such situation and their
writ petition not barred either as res judicata or as being
him in properly constituted. This directed the respondents to
treat petitioners senior to respondents, who were in lower
order of merit.
It is further contended in the writ petition that in the
matter of School Lecturers (English) in the same
Department, where appointments were delayed because of
the fault of the State authorities, the candidates were
accorded appointment from the date the candidates stood
lower in merit were appointed and they have been granted
all consequential benefits of services.
The petitioners approached the respondents by way
of representations for extending them same benefits of
service which have been granted to the candidates who
stood lower in merit than the petitioners, but till date
nothing has been done. Hence, this writ petition on behalf of
the petitioners for a direction to the respondents to treat
their appointment from the date the candidates lower in
merit, were given, with all consequential benefits of service,
such as seniority, continuity of service, pay fixation, grant of
annual grade increments.
Having regard to the facts of the case, writ petition is
disposed of requiring the petitioners to make a
representation to respondent no.2 - Director, Secondary
Education, Bikaner, alongwith a copy of this order, who shall,
after verifying the facts stated above, consider and decide
the same by a speaking order within a period of three
months from the date of its making, addressing the
grievance of the petitioners for extending them the relief as
[2023/RJJD/004302] (4 of 4) [CW-807/2023]
prayed for, as the candidates, who stood lower in merit, are
getting benefit of higher pay, seniority, annual grade
increments and other service benefits including the selection
scales. If the respondent no.2 decides to place the
petitioners above in seniority than the candidates who stood
lower in merit, then the petitioners would be entitled to all
benefits of seniority but they would be entitled only to
notional benefits."
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.
(ARUN BHANSALI),J
166-pradeep/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
