Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Banshi Lal vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 1 November, 2023
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
[2023:RJ-JD:37007]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6168/2020
1. Banshi Lal S/o Shri Brij Lal, Aged About 30 Years,
Resident Of Village Toprian, Tehsil Nohar, District
Hanumangarh. (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii (Level-I) At
Gupsk Dholikothi, Moujpur, Block Laxmangarh, District
Alwar).
2. Sahab Singh S/o Bhagwan Singh, Aged About 26 Years,
Resident Of Village Mudiya, Tehsil Todabhim, District
Karauli (Raj.).. (Posted As Teacher Grade Iii (Level-I) At
Gups, Moujpur, Block P.s. Laxmangarh, District Alwar).
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Rural
Development And Panchayati Raj Department,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Alwar.
4. The District Education Officer, Elementary, Alwar.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hanuman Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.K. Bissa
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
01/11/2023
1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioners have
challenged the orders dated 09.07.2020 and 20.07.2020, whereby
the respondents have reviewed the earlier order by which actual /
notional benefits were granted to the petitioners. By way of
impugned order the recovery of the amount paid in excess has
also been initiated.
(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 03:35:42 PM)
[2023:RJ-JD:37007] (2 of 4) [CW-6168/2020]
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the
petitioners have not mislead or misrepresented and benefits which
were granted to them by the respondent - State was in
accordance with law. It was submitted that the issue involved in
the present writ petition has already been set at rest by the co-
ordinate Bench of this Court vide its judgment dated 13.08.2019
in the case of Dal Chand Jat vs. The State of Rajasthan &
Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3063/2019.
3. Mr. K.K. Bissa accepts notice on behalf of the respondent
no.4.
4. Mr. Bissa, learned counsel for the respondents submitted
that an appeal has been preferred by the State against the
judgment in the case of Dal Chand Jat (supra) and the same is
pending consideration and therefore, the present writ petition be
kept pending.
5. However, learned counsel for the respondents was not in a
position to dispute the position of law, as has been settled by this
Court in the case of Dal Chand Jat (supra).
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering
the submissions made at the bar, this Court is of the view that no
fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending,
particularly when an interim order has been passed in petitioners'
favour by this Court on 30.07.2020.
7. In the case of Dal Chand Jat (supra), this Court has held
thus:
"After hearing counsel for the parties and
perusing record of the case, this Court finds
that the purport of the case law mentioned
above are that the petitioners, who were
(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 03:35:42 PM)
[2023:RJ-JD:37007] (3 of 4) [CW-6168/2020]
equally entitled and eligible to be appointed on
the post of Teacher Gr.-III where out of
advertisement of 2012-2013 at level I and
level II for various subjects are to be treated
at par with each other. The discrimination on
account of joining duties due to various bone
of contentions relating to eligibility and
qualifications have been nullified by aforesaid
judgments, including in the case of Hemlata
Shrimali (supra) and since all the candidates
who are now found eligible and as per existing
case law and the judgments of the Apex
Court, they have to be treated at par with
each other. There cannot be any doubt
regarding expressions made by this Court in
the previous litigation that these all the
petitioners who stand in merit and who have
qualified 2012-2013 recruitment for the post
of Teacher Grade-III would be entitled for the
notional benefits for the purpose including pay
fixation and seniority from the date their
equivalent or lesser merit person in that phase
of recruitment was given such benefits. This
Court also finds that focal averment raised by
the respondents that no monetary benefits can
be accorded to the petitioners for the period
when they were not actually discharging
services, is also a consistently answered in the
precedent of law laid down by this Court.
Thus, taking strength from the same
precedent of law as cited by counsel for the
parties, these petitions are disposed off with a
direction to the respondents that petitioners
shall be paid the notional benefits, including
benefits of seniority and pay fixation from the
stage when the appointment of persons at the
(Downloaded on 11/11/2023 at 03:35:42 PM)
[2023:RJ-JD:37007] (4 of 4) [CW-6168/2020]
same or lesser merit were appointed.
However, no monetary benefits where the
petitioners not having discharged actual
services would be payable.
Needless to say that any notional fixation
or any notional benefits which has resulted
into current payment and current position
where the petitioners are discharging their
services, shall not be recovered and shall be
continued to be paid.
In view of the aforesaid, it is directed that
no recovery in line with the aforesaid
observations be made from the petitioners."
8. In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed.
9. The impugned orders dated 09.07.2020 and 20.07.2020 are
quashed and set aside qua the petitioners.
10. Stay application also stands disposed of, accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA), J.
74-Mak/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
