Manoj Kumar Barjod vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 7110 Raj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 7110 Raj
Judgement Date : 13 September, 2023

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Manoj Kumar Barjod vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 13 September, 2023

Bench: Dinesh Mehta

[2023:RJ-JD:29349]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12285/2020

1. Manoj Kumar Barjod S/o Shri Kanti Lal, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village And Post Saliya Tehsil Gangadtalai, District Banswara.

2. Kalu Ram Katara S/o Khatuji Katara, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Gangadtalai, Tehsil Gangadtalai, District Banswara.

3. Sarwan Kumar Pargi S/o Punja Pargi, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Near Sr. Sec. School, Patiyagaliary, Post Bhaler Bhodar, Tehsil Anandpuri District Banswara.

4. Magan Lal Damor S/o Hatiya, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Village Michghati Post Patan Tehsil Kushalgarh District Banswara.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Elementary Education Government Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. Secretary, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

3. Director (Elementary Education), Bikaner.

4. Joint Director (Personnel) Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.

5. District Education Officer (Elementary Education), Banswara.

6. District Education Officer (Secondary Education), Banswara.

7. Chief Block Elementary Officer, Panchayat Samiti Gangadtalai, District Banswara.

8. Chief Block Elementary Officer, Panchayat Samiti Sajjangarh, District Banswara.

9. Chief Block Elementary Officer, Panchayat Samiti Khusalgarh, District Banswara.

10. Panchayat Elementary Officer, Government Senior Secondary School Rohan Wadi, Gram Panchayat Rohan Wadi Panchayat Samiti Ghatol District Banswara.

[2023:RJ-JD:29349] (2 of 5) [CW-12285/2020]

11. Panchayat Elementary Officer, Government Senior Secondary School Jeeva Khuta, Gram Panchayat Jeeva Khuta Panchayat Samiti Ghatol District Banswara.

12. Panchayat Elementary Officer, Government Senior Secondary School Rohania, Gram Panchayat Rohania Panchayat Samiti Ghatol District Banswara.

13. Panchayat Elementary Officer, Government Senior Secondary School Mahuda, Gram Panchayat Mahuda Panchayat Samiti Ghatol District Banswara.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramdev Potalia For Respondent(s) : Ms. Bhawna Jangid

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Order

13/09/2023

1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioners have

challenged the orders dated 02.09.2020 and 24.09.2020

(Annexures-9 & 10, respectively), 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.

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.

[2023:RJ-JD:29349] (3 of 5) [CW-12285/2020]

3. Learned counsel submitted that the only difference in the

case of Dal Chand Jat (supra) and the present case is that in the

case of Dal Chand Jat (supra) the recruitment was of the year

2012-2013, whereas in petitioner's case the same pertains to year

2004.

4. Ms. Bhawna Jangid, 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 03.03.2021.

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 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

[2023:RJ-JD:29349] (4 of 5) [CW-12285/2020]

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 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

[2023:RJ-JD:29349] (5 of 5) [CW-12285/2020]

into current payment and current position where the petitioners are discharging their services, shall not be recovered and shall be continued to be paid.