Kalu Ram Teli vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 1118 Raj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 1118 Raj
Judgement Date : 27 January, 2023

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Kalu Ram Teli vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 27 January, 2023

Bench: Dinesh Mehta

[2023/RJJD/002662]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1719/2023

1. Kalu Ram Teli S/o Shri Ishwar Lal, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village Suras Post Gadhwalo Ka Khera, Tehsil Hurda Distt. Bhilwara (Raj)

2. Ummed Singh S/o Shri Chandi Dan Charan, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Basni Cholawatan Post Bhopalgarh, Tehsil Bhopalgarh, District Jodhpur (Raj.)

3. Laxmi Narayan S/o Shri Janwari Lal, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village And Post Tausar Tehsil And District Nagaur ( Raj)

4. Megh Raj Rawal S/o Shri Bhanwar Nath Rawal, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Aasan Mohalla, Village Gagera Tehsil Hurda Distt. Bhilwara (Raj.)

5. Suresh Jat S/o Shri Shivji Ram Jat, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village And Post Awara Tehsil Malpura District Tonk (Raj.)

6. Raju Ram Jat S/o Shri Panna Ram, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village Nimba Ka Bass Post Bansa, Tehsil Didwana District Nagaur (Raj.)

7. Ramdayal S/o Shri Hardeen Ram, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village And Post Darmi , Tehsil Bhopalgarh District Jodhpur (Raj.)

8. Sunil Jangu S/o Shri Bhagawanaram, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village Jambheshwar Nagari Post Motai Distt. Jodhpur (Raj.)

9. Atmprakash Meel S/o Shri Shiva Kumar, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village And Post Hansalsar Tehsil Udaipurwati Distt. Jhunjhunu (Raj.)

10. Ajay Kumar Teli S/o Shri Moti Lal Teli, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village And Post Mandalgarh Tehsil Mandalgarh Distt. Bhilwara (Raj.)

11. Sandeep Kumar S/o Shri Sanwar Mal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village And Post Dabri Baloda Tehsil Nawalgarh Distt. Jhunjhunu (Raj.)

12. Chhotu Ram S/o Shri Gulla Ram, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village And Post Lichana Tehsil Nawa Distt. Nagaur (Raj.)

13. Lokendra Singh S/o Shri Charan Singh, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village And Post Matiyawas Tehsil Baseri Distt. Dholpur (Raj.)

14. Vikram Singh S/o Shri Ramee Singh, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village And Post Nahida Tehsil Mahwa Distt. Dausa (Raj.)

15. Indrajeet S/o Shri Baluya Ram, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Sad Mohalla Loha Mandi Deeg Tehsil Deeg Distt. Bharatpur (Raj.)

[2023/RJJD/002662] (2 of 3) [CW-1719/2023]

----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 For Respondent(s) :

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Order

27/01/2023

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

issue raised in the present writ petition is covered by the

judgment in Dara Singh v. State of 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 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

[2023/RJJD/002662] (3 of 3) [CW-1719/2023]

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. 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.