Lalit Kumar Gamot vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 4932 Raj

[2023/RJJD/016352]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6951/2023

1. Lalit Kumar Gamot S/o Naresh Gamot, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Vpo Paloda, Teh. Garhi, Dist. Banswara, At Present Posting Gups Khuntaneri, Block - Rishbhadev Dist. Udaipur.

2. Krati Bhatt D/o Ravindra Kumar Bhatt, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Vpo Talwara Teh. Banswara, Dist. Banswara, At Present Posting Gups Ambala Katnwada, Block Sarada, Dist. Udaipur.

3. Avinash Kothari S/o Hemraj Kothari, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Vpo Parsad, Tehsil., Sarada, Dist Udaipur Posted Gups Karel, Block Falasiya Udaipur.

4. Nirbhay Singh Charan S/o Narayan Singh Charan, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Vpo- Limbod Badi, Tehsil Sagwara, Dist Dungarpur, At Present Posting Gups Kyara, Block- Aburoad, Dist- Sirohi.

5. Antim Bala Shrimali D/o Purushottam Shrimali, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Pratap Nagar, Dungarpur. At Present Posting Gups Rampur Biyola, Dist. Dungarpur.

6. Krishna Gopal Pandiya S/o Durga Shanker Pandiya, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Vpo Gogla, Tehsil - Jhadol, District - Udaipur (Raj.), At Present Posting - Govt. Girls Upper Primary School Badrana, Block-Jhadol, Dist. Udaipur.

7. Milan Joshi S/o Dinesh Chandra Joshi, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Vpo- Khodan, Tehsil-Garhi, District-Banswara (Raj.), At Present Posting - Gups Bhungabhatt, Block Dhariyawad, Dist. Pratapgarh.

8. Dimple Jani D/o Bharat Kumar Jani, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Vpo- Saroda, Teh.-Sagwara, Dist.-Dungarpur, At Present Posting Gups Ghata Genji, Block - Jhonthri, Dist.- Dungarpur.

9. Sharda Joshi D/o Tolaram Joshi, Aged About 39 Years, R/ o Vpo- Sagatada, Teh.- Sarada, Dist.- Udaipur, At Present Posting Gups Naglai, Block- Rishbhadev, Dist. Udaipur.

10. Dinesh Suthar S/o Panna Lal Suthar, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Vpo Godana, Teh.- Jhadol(Ph.) Dist.-Udaipur, Present Posting - Mggs Lambadhawada, Block- Girwa, Dist.-Udaipur.

11. Richa Dwivedi D/o Naresh Chandra Bhatt, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Vpo Partapur, Tehsil Garhi District Banswara, At Present Posting Gups Mamadev, Block Kurabad, District Udaipur.

12. Arun Bhatt S/o Het Lal Bhatt, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Purohit Wari, Salumber, Dist.- Udaipur , Rajasthan. At

[2023/RJJD/016352] (2 of 6) [CW-6951/2023]

Present Posting Gups Mandas (Nathara), Block - Sarada, Dist - Udaipur.

13. Mahesh Suthar S/o Girdhari Lal Suthar, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Kishanpol Ghati Darwaja Baher Ka Saher Salumber, Dist. Udaipur, Rajasthan. At Present Posting Gsss Jawarada, Block -Salumber, Dist. Udaipur.

14. Jaya Sharma D/o Natawar Lal Sharma, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Vpo Banswara, Dist. Banswara, At Present Posting Gsss Liliya, Block Dalot, Dist. Pratapgarh.

15. Ruchi Joshi D/o Santosh Vyas, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Subhash Marg, Kushalgarh, Dist.- Banswara, Rajasthan. Present Posting Gups, Jhadap, Block - Jhallara, Dist - Udaipur.

16. Lalita Udawat D/o Suresh Kumar W/o Hemandra Menaria, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village And Post - Chirwa, Tehsil - Badgaon, District- Udaipur, Rajasthan. Present Posting - Gups Surana, Block - Girwa, District- Udaipur.

17. Manisha Bhatt D/o Manishanker Bhatt W/o Pankaj Akhadi, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Vpo.-Bhiluda, Sagwara, Dist. Dungarpur, Posting Place-Gups Jadela (Now Sr Sec), Block - Galiyacot, Dungarpur.

18. Prabha Shankar Sarwar S/o Jagdish Lal, Aged About 44 Years, R/o V/p- Sheshpur, Tehsil- Salumber, Dist. - Udaipur, Rajasthan, At Present Posting Gsss Dhadhavali, Block - Jhadol, Dist. -Udaipur.

19. Neeti Joshi D/o Jagdish Chandra Joshi, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Trivedi Bhawan, Near Bridge Nagarpalika- Rishabhdeo, Dist- Udaipur. Present Posting Gups Bilkhai, Block- Rishabhdeo, Dist.- Udaipur.

20. Manisha Pancholi D/o Mansharam Pancholi, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Vpo Paloda Teh.garhi, Dist. Banswara, Present Posting Gsss Limboda Block-Jhallara, Dist.- Udaipur.

21. Mohasina Pathan D/o Zahid Hussain, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Mohallah Ghanti Madar Fali Dungarpur, At Present Posting -Gups Lodan Fala (Nalwa), District - Dungarpur.

22. Twinkal Pandya D/o Bhupendra Pandya, Aged About 30 Years, R/o V/p Leelwasa Aspur, At Present Posting -Gups Lapiya, Block - Aspur District - Dungarpur.

23. Priyanka Jain D/o Vipin Chandra Jain, Aged About 36 Years, R/o V/p Dewal, Dungarpur, Place Of Posting-Gups Dolwar Nichli, Block - Dowra, Dist. Dungarpur.

24. Hetu Choubisa D/o Digvijay Choubisa, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Rnt Colony Dungarpur, At Present Gsss Bhatwada, Block - Dungarpur, District - Dungarpur.

[2023/RJJD/016352] (3 of 6) [CW-6951/2023]

25. Chhaya Kumari Sompura D/o Vinod Chandra Sompura, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Salatwara, Teh. Sagwara, Dist.- Dungarpur, Place Of Posting -Gups Badatalab, Block- Jallara, Dist-Udaipur.

26. Monika Lohar D/o Bharat Lal Lohar W/o Hemant Kumar Luhar, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village Surajgoan, Teh. Galiyacot, Dist. Dungarpur, At Present Posting Gups Bhimpur Barbadi, Block Jhallara, Dist Udaipur.

27. Ronak Dixit S/o Madhukar Dixit, Aged About 36 Years, R/ o Khadagada, Teh- Sagwara, Dist- Dungarpur, Place Of Posting- Gups Mundla, Block- Sarada, Dist- Udaipur.

28. Jayanti Lal Patel S/o Meghaji Patel, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Village -Futala, Post-Bhanda, Teh- Kherwara, Dist- Udaipur, Place Of Posting- Svgms Kherwara, Block- Kherwara, Dist- Udaipur.

29. Bhaktaveer Singh Rathor S/o Narpat Singh Rathor, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Vpo Ratadiya, Teh- Galiyakot, Dist- Dungatpur, At Present Posting Svgms Kherwara, Block - Kherwara, Dist - Udaipur.

30. Lalit Kumar S/o Deveng, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Vpo Bagidora, Teh. Bagidora, Dist. Banwara, At Present Posting Gsss Patharpadi, Block Kotra, Dist. Udaipur.

31. Vijay Laxmi Kansara D/o Badri Prasad Kansara, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Sonar Mata Road Salumber, Teh.- Salumber, Dist.-Udaipur, Rajasthan. At Present Posting Gups Tejpura (Devgoan), Block-Jhallara, Dist-Udaipur.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Rural And Panchayati Raj, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2. The Secretary, Department Of Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

3. The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner, District Bikaner, Rajasthan.

4. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Udaipur, District Udaipur, Rajasthan.

5. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Dungarpur, District Dungarpur, Rajasthan.

6. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Sirohi, District Sirohi, Rajasthan.

7. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Pratapgarh, District Pratapgarh, Rajasthan.

8. The District Education Officer, Elementary Education, District Udaipur, Rajasthan.

[2023/RJJD/016352] (4 of 6) [CW-6951/2023]

9. The District Education Officer, Elementary Education, District Dungarpur, Rajasthan.

10. The District Education Officer, Elementary Education, District Sirohi, Rajasthan.

11. The District Education Officer, Elementary Education, District Pratapgarh, Rajasthan.

                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Gajendra Singh Shekhawat
For Respondent(s)         :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR Order

19/05/2023

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that for

the same recruitment, similarly situated petitioners had

approached Jaipur Bench of this Court in Om Prakash & Ors. vs.

State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.21214/2017,

which writ petition has been decided on 21.11.2017 granting relief

to the petitioners in light of judgment in the case of Hemlata

Shrimali & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ

Petition No.3247/2015, decided on 1.4.2015 and relying upon the

adjudication in the case of Suman Bai & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan

& Ors. : 2009 (1) WLC (Raj.) 381 and, therefore, the present writ

petition may also be decided in light of judgment in the case of

Om Prakash (supra).

In the case of Om Prakash (supra), the Bench at Jaipur after

noticing orders in the case of Hemlata Shrimali (supra) and

Suman Bai (supra) observed as under:-

"Learned counsel for the petitioners, at the very outset, submits that the controversy raised in the instant writ application stands resolved in view of the

[2023/RJJD/016352] (5 of 6) [CW-6951/2023]

adjudication made by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in a batch of writ applications lead case being S.B. Civil Writ Petition Number 3247/2015: Hemlata Shrimali & Ors. Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors., decided on 1st Apri., 2015, relying upon the adjudication in the case of Suman Bai & Anr. Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors.: 2009 (1) WLC (Raj.) 381, observing thus:

"5. Upon consideration of the arguments aforesaid and the judgment of the Division Bench in Hari Ram and the subsequent order dated 21.7.2001 whereby clarification application of the State Government was dismissed, I find that the entitlement of the petitioner for appointment on the basis of originally prepared merit list cannot be denied. If admittedly the candidates, who are lower in merit, have been granted appointment, those who are above them in the merit cannot be denied such right of appointment. Seniority as per the rules in the case of direct recruitment on the post in question is required to be assigned on the basis of placement of candidates in the select list and when the selection is common and the merit list on the basis of which appointments were made is also common, right to secure appointment to both the set of employees thus flows from their selection which in turn is based on merit. Regard being had to all these facts, merely because one batch of employee approached this Court later and another earlier, and both of them having been appointed, the candidates who appeared lower in merit cannot certainly be placed at a higher place in seniority. It was on this legal analogy that Division Bench of this Court in Niyaz Mohd.Khan (supra) held that the petitioner therein entitled to be placed in seniority in order of merit of common selection amongst persons appointed in pursuance of the same selection with effect from the date person lower in order of merit than the petitioner was appointed with consequential benefits.

6. I am not inclined to accept the argument of the learned counsel for the respondents No.4 to 8 that the judgment of the learned Single Judge should be so read so as to infer therefrom that though the petitioners would be entitled to claim appointment but not seniority above the candidates who are already appointed even though they admittedly are above them in the merit list. Infact, the judgment of the learned Single Judge merely reiterated the direction of the Division Bench in Hari Ram (supra) in favour of the petitioners. But construction of that judgment in the manner in which the respondents

[2023/RJJD/016352] (6 of 6) [CW-6951/2023]

want this Court to do, would negat the mandate of the Rules 20 and 21 of the Rajasthan Education Subordinate Service Rules, 1971, which requires seniority to be assigned as per the inter-se merit of 7 the candidates in the merit list based on common selection. Even otherwise, no such intention of the Court is discernible from reading of that judgment. Mere appointment of the petitioner was a sufficient compliance of the judgment and not total compliance was the view taken by this Court also when contempt petition filed by the petitioners was dismissed. Question with regard to correct and wrong assignment of seniority having arisen subsequent to appointment of the petitioners would obviously give rise to a afresh cause of action. The writ petition filed by the petitioners, therefore, cannot be thrown either barred by resjudicata or otherwise improperly constituted.

7. In the result, this writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to treat the petitioners senior to respondents No.4 to 8 as per their placement in the merit list."

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that instant writ application be also disposed off in terms of the order dated 24th May, 2017, as extracted herein above.

Ordered accordingly."

In view of the submissions made, the present writ petition

filed by the petitioners is also disposed of in light of order passed

in the case of Om Prakash (supra).

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.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 144-Shahenshah/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)