Sunil Sharma vs State Of Raj And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 631 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

              S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2170/2017
Dinesh Kumar Saini S/o Shri Krishan Swroop Saini, aged about
48 years, R/o J-5, Subhash Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur Rajasthan.
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
1.    State   Of      Rajasthan      Through         The       Chief   Secretary,
      Rajasthan Secretariat, Jaipur.
2.    Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
      Secretariat, Jaipur.
3.    Secretary, Education Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
      Secretariat, Jaipur.
                                                                ----Respondents

Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2169/2017 Brij Mohan Kumawat S/o Shri Kanhiya Lal, aged about 55 years, Asiwal Bhawan, Jamna Colony, Sikar Road, Jaipur Rajasthan

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through The Chief Secretary, Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur

2. Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur

3. Secretary, Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur

----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2171/2017 Sunil Sharma S/o Shri Shyam Sundar Sharma, aged 51 years, R/o 131, Brij Mandal Colony, Jhotwara, Jaipur (Raj.) Presently R/o 232-D, Officers campus Ext. Vishnu Marg Sirsi Road, Jaipur.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through The Chief Secretary, Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur

2. Secretary, Department Of Personnel, Govt. Of Rajasthan,

(2 of 6) [CW-2170/2017]

Secretariat, Jaipur

3. Secretary, Education Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Akhil Simlote, Adv. with Mr.Ashvini Raj Tanwar, Adv. & Mr.Dikshant Jain, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr.S. Zakawat Ali, Addl. Govt.

Counsel.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR

Order

18/01/2023

These writ petitions since involve common issue and as

such, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, same

are decided by a common order.

The petitioners in all the cases had participated in the

selection process for the post of Lower Divisional Clerk (LDC) in

pursuance of Competitive Examination conducted by the

Rajasthan Public Service Commission (RPSC) in 1986. The RPSC

had prepared the District wise merit list, however, the persons

who were lower in merit, were appointed in the different Districts

and the State Government, later on, issued the notification to

consider the cases of those persons, who were not appointed in

spite of having better merit. The petitioners initially approached

this Court for assigning them proper seniority and to grant them

consequential benefits on their appointment on the basis of merit

list, which was not to be prepared District wise basis.

The writ petitions filed by the petitioner were not

entertained by this Court and as such, the petitioners were

(3 of 6) [CW-2170/2017]

directed to avail the alternative remedy by filing appeal before the

Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal (hereafter 'the

Tribunal'). The Tribunal, vide order dated 23.02.2016, has

dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioners, by observing that

since the claim of the writ petitioners, was already adjudicated on

merits by this Court and as such, the appeals filed by them were

not maintainable and the same were dismissed.

Learned counsel for the petitioners Mr.Akhil Simlote

submitted that the issue of assigning of proper seniority to the

petitioners and consequential benefits therein on account of not

giving the posting to the petitioners in spite of having better

merit, is no more res integra and as such, counsel refers to orders

passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ

Petition No.18208/2019 titled as Narendra Kumar

Boolchandani & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. dated

18.12.2019 and order dated 10.12.2019 passed in S.B. Civil Writ

Petition No.17012/2019 titled as Rakesh Purohit & Ors. Vs.

State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

aforesaid two orders were passed by the Coordinate Bench of this

Court on the basis of judgment passed by the Jaipur Bench in the

case of Suman Bai & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

reported in [(2009)1 WLC (Raj.) 381.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

judgment passed by the Single Bench was put to challenge by the

Employer-State before the Principal Seat at Jodhpur by filing D.B.

Special Appeal (Writ) No.362/2020 titled as The Director,

Secondary Education, Rajasthan Bikaner Vs. Narendra

Kumar Boolchandani & Ors. and other connected Special

(4 of 6) [CW-2170/2017]

Appeals and the Division Bench vide common order dated

04.02.2022, disposed of the appeals, by permitting the petitioners

therein to file representations before the State Government and as

such, representations were to be decided by the State in

accordance with law. The relevant portion of order passed by the

Division Bench is quoted as hereunder:-

"In view of the peculiar circumstances, these appeals are disposed of by permitting the Government to take into account the representations already made or to be filed by any of the petitioners within one month. In the process, the authorities will bear in mind the stand taken by the department in similar cases. Such representations would be decided in accordance with law unmindful of the observations and directions issued by the learned Single Judge in the impugned orders. Eventually, if the grievances of the petitioners still survive after the Government decision, it is open for the petitioners to seek redressal thereafter in accordance with law The appeals are disposed of accordingly."

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

order passed by the Division Bench on 04.02.2022, has duly been

complied with and as such, counsel refers to an order dated

21.12.2022 passed by the District Education Officer

(Headquarters), Secondary Education, Jodhpur, wherein benefit

has been conferred in favour of the petitioners, who had filed the

writ petition before the Single Bench and as such, counsel refers

to one candidate namely Rakesh Purohit, whose name has been

placed at Serial No.1 in the said order and such person has been

given benefit of regularization on a notional basis with effect from

02.02.1990 i.e. the date when a person lower in merit i.e. Rakesh

Purohit was appointed.

(5 of 6) [CW-2170/2017]

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that now

in wake of implementation of order passed by the Division Bench,

cases of the petitioners are also required to be decided by the

respondents in a similar manner and the benefits which flow from

appointment of the petitioners qua the less meritorious person

need to be conferred in their favour.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

petitioners are prepared to submit their representation(s) before

the Authorities concerned for availing the benefit, as has been

given in other similarly situated cases and as such, this Court may

give time bound direction to the respondents to decide the said

representations.

Learned Addl. Govt. Counsel for the respondents-State

Mr.S. Zakawat Ali submitted that the petitioners had earlier filed

the writ petition and the same came to be dismissed and the

appeal filed by the petitioners thereagainst, has also been

dismissed and as such, claim of the petitioners cannot be

reexamined.

Learned Addl. Govt. Counsel further submitted that the

judgment which has been passed by the Division Bench is not a

judgment in rem but a judgment in personam and as such, benefit

can be given to only those candidates who had approached the

Court earlier.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the material available on record.

This Court finds that the Division Bench of this Court

has already considered the issue with regard to granting benefit to

the candidates, who were not assigned proper seniority and

consequential benefits on account of having better merit and as

(6 of 6) [CW-2170/2017]

such, considering these aspects of the matter, the order passed by

the Single Bench was not interfered by the Division Bench and the

same was modified to the extent of permitting the petitioners

therein to file representation before the Authorities.

This Court further finds that the Authorities on the basis

of judgments passed by the Single Bench and the Division Bench

has now decided to grant benefit to the similarly situated persons

and as such, they have also issued order dated 21.12.2022,

granting benefit to certain other similarly situated persons.

This Court, considering all the above facts, deems it

proper to dispose of these writ petitions by giving liberty to the

petitioners to file a detailed representation before the Competent

Authority along with the documents on which they intend to rely in

support of their claim.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

representations will be filed by the petitioners within a period of

three weeks. The Authorities concerned are directed to look into

the grievance of the petitioners and treatment which has been

given to the other similarly situated candidates may also be kept

in mind by the Authorities while deciding the representations and

accordingly, reasoned and speaking order will be passed by the

Authorities within a period of five weeks after receipt of the

representation.

Resultantly, the present writ petitions stand disposed

of, in view of above terms.

A copy of this order be placed in each petition.

(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR),J

Himanshu Soni/62-64

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)