Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Tarachand Saini vs State Of Rajasthan on 4 January, 2023
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 51/2023
1. Tarachand Saini S/o Shri Manakchand Saini, Aged About
28 Years, R/o Bhagatji Ki Dhani, Dhoblai Road, Itawa
Bhopji, Police Station Samod District Jaipur Rural (Raj.).
2. Babu Lal S/o Shri Prabhu Ram, Aged About 31 Years, R/o
Village Khardiya, Post Singhana, Tehsil Didwana, District
Nagaur (Raj.).
3. Shimla Yadav D/o Shri Ramswaroop Yadav W/o Shri
Bhagchand Yadav, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village
Kathamana, Tehsil Piplu, District Tonk (Raj.).
4. Archana Kumari Meena W/o Shri Jitendra Kumar
Ushahara, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village Thekdeen,
Post Balloopura, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Alwar (Raj.).
5. Guddi Bai Sulaniya W/o Shri Mukesh Kumar Meena, Aged
About 31 Years, R/o Village And Post Sakat, Tehsil
Rajgarh, District Alwar (Raj.).
6. Prem Chand Verma S/o Shri Jainarayan Verma, Aged
About 30 Years, R/o Village And Post Teja Ka Bas, Tehsil
Phulera, District Jaipur (Raj.).
7. Poonam Devi W/o Shri Mukesh Kumar Choudhary D/o
Shri Naval Singh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village
Raypur Jat, Tehsil Laxmangarh, District Alwar (Raj.).
8. Sawai Dan S/o Shri Ras Dan, Aged About 32 Years, R/o
Village Bandhali, Post Bhaluri, Tehsil Kolayat, District
Bikaner (Raj.).
9. Jeet Ram Prajapat S/o Shri Sita Ram Prajapat, Aged
About 28 Years, R/o Village Alinagar, Post Bagdwa, Tehsil
Peeplu, District Tonk (Raj.).
10. Parwati Meena D/o Shri Jagdish Meena, Aged About 35
Years, R/o Village Bharatkhera Ganeshpura, Post Sarsiya
Tehsil Jahajpur, District Bhilwara (Raj.).
11. Smt. Madhu Rajawat D/o Shri Hanuman Singh W/o Shri
Vikram Singh, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village And Post
Mehandwas, Tehsil And District Tonk (Raj.).
12. Govind Singh Meena S/o Ramray Meena, Aged About 33
Years, R/o Village And Post Jalampura, Tehsil Jahazpur,
District Bhilwara (Raj.).
(2 of 4) [CW-51/2023]
13. Mayaram Singh S/o Shri Bhogiram, Aged About 30 Years,
R/o Village Chhavari Ka Pura, Post Matsura, Tehsil Bari,
District Dholpur (Raj.).
14. Kuldeep S/o Shri Shiv Bhagwan Thalor, Aged About 30
Years, R/o Village And Post Sutot, Tehsil Laxmangarh,
District Sikar (Raj.).
15. Surksha Kumar S/o Shri Ram Kumar, Aged About 32
Years, R/o Village Meerka, Post Basai, 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
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
04/01/2023
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
(3 of 4) [CW-51/2023]
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. Without going into the merits of the case, the writ petition is
disposed of with direction to the petitioners to file a
representation before the competent authority of the respondents
along with certified copy of the order instant and photo-stat copy
of the judgment in the case of Dara Singh (supra) with a period of
two weeks.
4. In case, a representation is so addressed within the
aforesaid period, the competent authority of respondents shall
decide the same and consider petitioners' entitlement in
accordance with the law laid down in the case of Dara Singh
(supra) law as early as possible, preferably within a period of
eight weeks.
5. It is made clear that aforesaid direction to decide the
representation has been issued only with a view to ensure
expeditious redressal of petitioners' grievance. The same may
(4 of 4) [CW-51/2023]
not be construed to be an order to decide the representation in a
particular manner.
6. The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
113-A.Arora/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
