Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Manish Swami vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 9 May, 2023

Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur

[2023/RJJD/014252]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6276/2023

1. Manish Swami S/o Basant Kumar Swami, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Ward No. 11 Mawliyon Ka Bas, Ratangarh, District Churu (Raj.).

2. Chutra Ram S/o Penpa Ram, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village Gajeshingnagar, Post Bhungara, Tehsil Shergarh, District Jodhpur (Raj.).

3. Amit Kumar Singodia S/o Kanhaiya La Singodia, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Ladnun By Pass Road, Chand Bas, Sujangarh, District Churu (Raj.).

4. Prakash Chandra Maliwad S/o Kantilal Maliwad, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Teejwad, Post Bildi, Tehsil And District Dungarpur (Raj.).

5. Reshav S/o Tej Singh, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Kerwa Jat, Post Khanpur Jat, Tehsil And District Alwar (Raj.).

6. Anil Kumar S/o Karmveer, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village Amarpura Kalan, Post Badsari Ka Bass, Tehsil Surajgarh, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.).

7. Ranjeet Nehara S/o Devi Lal, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Vpo Mokalsar, Tehsil Suratgarh, District Sriganganagar (Raj.).

8. Udal Singh S/o Malkhan Singh, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village Bhadoli, Post Singhniyan, Tehsil Todabhim, District Karauli (Raj.).

9. Raj Kumar S/o Omprakash, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Vpo Bhagela, Tehsil Sidhmukh, District Churu (Raj.).

10. Magan Lal Pandor S/o Laxman Lal Pandor, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village Kanela, Post Chandarwara, Tehsil Anandpuri, District Banswara (Raj.).

11. Naresh Chandra Khant S/o Ravji, Aged About 32 Years, R/ o Village Pachor, Post Chandarwada, Tehsil Anandpuri, District Banswara (Raj.).

12. Rajendra Kumar Khant S/o Rupsee Khant, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Village Pachor, Post Chandarwada, Tehsil Anandpuri, District Banswara (Raj.).

13. Hariprasad Khant S/o Ravaji Khant, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village Pachor, Post Chandarwada, Tehsil Anandpuri, District Banswara (Raj.).

14. Sanjeet Kumar S/o Sikander, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village Dughera, Post Dughera Tehsil Bahror, District Alwar (Raj.).

15. Maya Ahari D/o Ruplal Ahari, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Mukam Dara, Post Dara, Tehsil And District Dungarpur (Raj.).

16. Suresh Kumar S/o Poornram, Aged About 28 Years, R/o

[2023/RJJD/014252] (2 of 7) [CW-6276/2023]

Chak 20 Bd, 61 Head, Tehsil Khajuwala, District Bikaner (Raj.).

17. Narendra Kumar Gameti S/o Laxman Lal Gameti, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Vpo Talaiya, Tehsil Bichhiwara, District Dungarpur (Raj.).

18. Ramesh Lal Pandor S/o Laxman Lal Pandor, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Mukam Kwaliyadara, Post Talaiya, Tehsil Bichhiwara, District Dungarpur (Raj.).

19. Mayank Swami S/o Govind Swami, Aged About 24 Years, R/o H.no. 14, Ashok Vihar Colony, Near Sophia School, Jaipur Bikaner Road, Bikaner (Raj.).

20. Madhuri Ujjaniya D/o Ladu Ram Ujjaniya, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Hanuman Nagar, Kunchalwara Kalan, Deoli, Tehsil Jahazpur, District Bhilwara (Raj.).

21. Praveen Kumar S/o Samartha Ram Prajapat, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Opp. Sbi Bank, Vpo Rohida, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi (Raj.).

22. Ramchandra S/o Puna Ram Bishnoi, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Vpo Bher, Tehsil Khinwsar, District Nagaur (Raj.).

23. Dheeraj Saini S/o Santosh Kumar Saini, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Opposite Radio Towar, Near Kailash Provision Store, Tilak Nagar, Bikaner (Raj.).

24. Murari Lal Kushawah S/o Dev Narayan Kushawah, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Plot No. 04 Heera Vihar, Rampura Road, Kalyanpura, Sanganer, Jaipur (Raj.).

25. Kanti Lal Gameti S/o Haliya Gameti, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Mukam Baladeet, Post Thana, Tehsil And District Dungarpur (Raj.).

26. Sanjay S/o Benji, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village Garadiya, Post Mahudi, Tehsil Sajjangarh, District Banswara (Raj.).

27. Jitender Singh S/o Karani Singh, Aged About 34 Years, R/ o Vpo Khajuwala, Tehsil Khajuwala, District Bikaner (Raj.).

28. Abhishek S/o Bhinya Ram, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Shyamupura, Post Rasaliyawas, Tehsil Merta City, District Nagaur (Raj.).

29. Rahul S/o Subhash Chander, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Near Tehsil, Ward No. 12 Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh (Raj.).

30. Nikita Bhama D/o Maneesh Kumar Bhama, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Jaria Road, Naya Bass, Ward No. 24, Sujangarh, District Churu (Raj.).

31. Kishan Gopal Suthar S/o Aasha Ram Suthar, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Gali No. 2B, Rampura Basti, Lalgarh, Bikaner (Raj.).

32. Deep Singh S/o Rughnath Singh, Aged About 43 Years, R/ o Purohito Ki Dhaniya, Po Pandit Ji Dhani, Tehsil Osian,

[2023/RJJD/014252] (3 of 7) [CW-6276/2023]

District Jodhpur (Raj.).

33. Satyendra Kumar Sharma S/o Moti Ram Sharma, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Agrasen Colony, Post Bari, Tehsil Bari, District Dholpur (Raj.).

34. Pushpendra Gahlot S/o Bhanwar Lal Gahlot, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Hanuman Shiv Mandir Ke Pass, Near Laxmi Woolan Mill, Sarvodaya Basti, Bikaner (Raj.).

35. Arvind Mahiya S/o Ramchandra Mahiya, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Vpo Jalsoo Nanak, Tehsil Degana, District Nagaur (Raj.).

36. Dinesh Kumar S/o Suresh Kumar, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Purvat Fali Bas, Antgarh, Post Jk Puram, Tehsil Basantgarh, District Sirohi (Raj.).

37. Anita Kumari Meena D/o Birdhi Lal Meena, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Bhanky Kheri, Post Borina Kalan, Tehsil Sangod, District Kota (Raj.).

38. Ravi Kant Meena S/o Laxmi Nath, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Tosya, Post Mamor, Tehsil Kanwas, District Kota (Raj.).

39. Deepak Kumar Sharma S/o Satya Prakash Sharma, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Ward No. 17, Dheeraj Garh Colony, Khandela, District Sikar (Raj.).

40. Umesh Kumar S/o Shayopat Ram, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Ward No. 09, 14 Mks Shergarh, District Hanumangarh (Raj.).

41. Pradeep Kumar S/o Mahavir Prasad Jakhar, Aged About 35 Years, R/o D-123, Basant Vihar, Jhunjhunu, Tehsil And District Jhunjhunu (Raj.).

42. Lekh Ram S/o Mana Ram, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Ward No. 05 Lalgarhjattan, District Sri Ganganagar (Raj.).

43. Ashok Kumar S/o Mansa Ram, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Ward No. 07 21/23 Np Thandi Tehsil Raisinghnagar, District Sri Ganganagar (Raj.).

44. Sayyad Hedar Ali S/o Sayyad Sajid Ali, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Mirza Mohalla, Malarna Dungar, Tehsil Malarna Dungar District Swaimadhopur (Raj.).

45. Faruk Khan S/o Sadule Khan, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Vpo Hamusar Tehsil Ratangarh, District Churu (Raj.).

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. Principal Secretary, Education Department (Elementary) Government Of Rajasthan Secretariat, Jaipur.

3. The Director, Elementary Education Rajasthan Bikaner (Raj.).

[2023/RJJD/014252] (4 of 7) [CW-6276/2023]

4. Rajasthan Staff Selection Board, Jaipur (Raj.) Office Address State Agriculture Management Institution Campus Durgapura Jaipur (Raj.) Through Its Chairman.

5. National Council For Teacher Education, Wing Ii, Hans Bhawan, Bhadur Shah Jafar Marg, New Delhi, Through Its Secretary.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sushil Bishnoi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pankaj Sharma, AAG

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

09/05/2023

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Since, common question of facts and law is involved in the

present writ petition, therefore, the same is being heard and

decided by this common order.

On 02.01.2023, following order was passed by this court:-

"1. Mr. Bishnoi, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in relation to the recruitment earlier initiated, a coordinate bench of this Court passed a detailed interim order in favour of the candidates in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.821/2022 (Surya Prakash Achara & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.).

2. In view of the above, issue notice. Issue notice of stay application also.

3. Mr. Pankaj Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. D.S. Beniwal, learned counsel accept notice on behalf of the respondents.

4. Meanwhile, it is directed that the respondents (including the Staff Selection Board) shall permit the petitioners and all other candidates, who have done their graduation with additional subject, to apply pursuant to advertisement dated 16.12.2022 subject to outcome of the present writ petition as well as the Special Leave Petitions pending before Hon'ble the Supreme Court.

[2023/RJJD/014252] (5 of 7) [CW-6276/2023]

5. As the online application forms do not provide for filing of the applications by candidates, who have done their graduation with additional subject, the respondent No.4 shall do the needful in this regard so as to provide opportunity to all the candidates like the petitioners to apply pursuant to the advertisement dated 16.12.2022.

6. It is further directed that the mechanism for filing applications shall be provided in a manner that candidates, who have done their graduation with additional subject, are grouped separately from other candidates, so as to give effect to the judgments in the present writ petition and/ or the Special Leave petitions pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

7. The respondent- Staff Selection Board would be free to decide about the mechanism in this regard as learned counsel representing the respondent- Staff Selection Board made submissions that the applications would have to be invited online only and for providing the said facility, the software would be required to be updated/ modified which will take some time.

8. The needful may be done by the respondents and adequate opportunity be provided to the petitioners and all other similarly placed candidates, who have done their graduation with additional subject.

9. Remaining similarly placed candidates may not approach this Court for the purpose of claiming interim relief as the State would not restrict any of the candidates for want of specific interim orders in their favour.

10. The candidature of the petitioners and all other candidates with additional degree, who have been permitted to furnish online applications by virtue of other order instant, would be subject to decision in pending Special Leave Petitions before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and/ or order passed in the present petition.

11. The response to the petition, if any, be filed within a period of four weeks.

12. List this case after four weeks".

[2023/RJJD/014252] (6 of 7) [CW-6276/2023]

The counsel for the petitioners submits that during the

pendency of the present writ petition, the petitioners have been

permitted to appear in the examination conducted by the

respondents.

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the

respondents are aware of the fact that the matter is getting

attention of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

On 04.01.2023, the following order was passed by the

respondent State:-

"Øekad%i-14¼107½[email protected]@izk-f'[email protected]/;[email protected]@[email protected]@1290 fnukad% 04-01-23

&%% la'kksf/kr foKfIr %%& mPp izkFkfed fo|ky; v/;kid lh/kh HkrhZ&2022 cksMZ }kjk mPp izkFkfed fo|ky; v/;kid lh/kh HkrhZ&2022 ds vUrxZr v/;kid ysoy&f}rh;] d{kk 6 ls 8 ds fofHkUu inksa ij lh/kh HkrhZ gsrq fu/kkZfjr ;ksX;rk/kkjh vkosndksa ls foKfIr la[;k [email protected] fnukad 16-12-2022 dks tkjh dj vkWuykbZu vkosnu (Online Application Form) fnukad 21-12- 2022 ls 19-01-2023 jkf= 12%00 cts rd vkeaf=r fd;s tk jgs gSA

ekuuh; jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky; }kjk ;kfpdk la[;k [email protected] eas ikfjr varfje vkns'k fnukad 05-02-2022 rFkk loksZPp U;k;ky; es yfEcr fo'ks"k vuqefr ;kfpdk ds Øe esa mPp izkFkfed fo|ky; v/;kid lh/kh HkrhZ&2022 ds varxZr vfrfjDr fo"k; ls Lukrd mRrh.kZ vH;FkhZ Hkh bl HkrhZ g srq vkWuykbZu vkosnu dj ldsaxsA ;g vuqefr loksZPp U;k;ky; esa yfEcr fo'ks"k vuqefr ;kfpdk ds vafre fu.kZ; ds v/;/khu jgsxhA"

In view of the order dated 04.01.2023, the candidature of

the petitioners have been provisionally considered and the same

will be governed by final outcome by the Supreme Court.

Having considered the submissions made before this court,

the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the

respondents to provisionally consider the candidature of the

[2023/RJJD/014252] (7 of 7) [CW-6276/2023]

petitioners in accordance with law and grant them relief in

accordance with law subject to final outcome of the Special Leave

Petitions pending before the Supreme Court.

It is made clear that the benefits extended to the petitioners

will be purely on provisional basis subject to the final outcome of