Rameshwar Prasad Kasana (Belt No. ... vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 7875 Raj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 7875 Raj
Judgement Date : 4 October, 2023

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Rameshwar Prasad Kasana (Belt No. ... vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 4 October, 2023

Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur

[2023:RJ-JD:32638]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15048/2023

1. Rameshwar Prasad Kasana (Belt No. 1089) S/o Shri Motilal Kasana, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village And Post Bawanpada, Tehsil Sikarai District Dausa (Raj.)

2. Dharmendra Sharma (Belt No. 1090) S/o Shri Omprakash Sharma, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village And Psot Rampura, Tehsil Saithal, District Dausa (Raj.)

3. Ashish Kumar (Belt No. 1091) S/o Shri Ramesh Chand Sharma, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village And Post Jon, Tehsil Nangal Rajavatan, District Dausa (Raj.)

4. Sohan Singh (Belt No. 1092) S/o Shri Ram Singh, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village And Post Thoon, Tehsil Nagar, District Bharatpur (Raj.)

5. Mukesh Kumar Bairwa (Belt No. 1093) S/o Shri Ghashiram Bairwa, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village Anantpura Post Panditpura, Thana Baswa, District Dausa (Raj.)

6. Mansingh Gurjar (Belt No. 1095) S/o Shri Kajodmal Gurjar, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village Hindupura Post Bishanpura, Tehsil - Sathail, District Dausa (Raj.)

7. Jalsingh Gurjar (Belt No. 1097) S/o Shri Ramsingh Gurjar, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Vpo Badoli, Tehsil Dausa, District Dausa (Raj.)

8. Rakesh Kumar Bairwa (Belt No. 1100) S/o Shri Laluram Bairwa, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village And Post Manpur, Tehsil Sikarai District Dausa (Raj.)

9. Dilip (Belt No. 1099) S/o Shri Omprakash, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Mahtoli Post Chaitoli, Tehsil Bhusawar, District Bharatpur (Raj.)

10. Ramakant Pandey (Belt No. 1590) S/o Shri Subhash Chand Pandey, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village And Post Pandey Roopbash, Tehsil Raini, District Alwar (Raj.)

11. Shivcharan Trivedi (Belt No. 1096) S/o Shri Nathulal, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village And Post Hingotia, Tehsil Lavan, District Dausa (Raj.)

12. Mukesh Gurjar (Belt No. 1094) S/o Shri Birbal Gurjar, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village And Post Kailai Tehsil Sikarai District Dausa (Raj.)

[2023:RJ-JD:32638] (2 of 3) [CW-15048/2023]

13. Rishi Kumar Tiwadi (Belt No. 1087) S/o Shri Shivcharan Tiwadi, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village And Post Subdavli, Tehsil Baswa, Distrct Dausa (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 (Jaipur Range), Jaipur (Rajasthan)

4. Superintendent Of Police, Dausa (Raj.)

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Jhanjharia, through VC

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

04/10/2023

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 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

[2023:RJ-JD:32638] (3 of 3) [CW-15048/2023]

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. In view of the submissions made, the writ petition filed by

the petitioners is disposed of with similar directions to the

respondents No.3 & 4 as given in the case of Dara Singh (supra).

4. 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.