Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jagpal Singh vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:8662) on 20 February, 2024
Author: Dinesh Mehta
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
[2024:RJ-JD:8662]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2333/2024
1. Jagpal Singh S/o Dalpat Singh Chundawat, Aged About 31
Years, Village Johaniya, Ratanpura, Khodan, District
Banswara, At Present Working Belt No. 1061, Constable
Police Station Salopaat, District Banswara.
2. Mukesh Kumar Garasiya S/o Sh. Makhala Garasiya, Aged
About 33 Years, Ward No. 8, Lankai, Banswara, At Present
Working Belt No. 1062, Constable Reserve Police Line,
Banswara.
3. Kamlesh Singada S/o Nanalal Singada, Aged About 36
Years, Mokampura, Banswara, At Present Constable Belt
No. 1058, Police Station Ambapura, District Banswara.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary Department
Of Home, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director General Of Police Head Quarter, Jaipur.
3. The Inspector General Of Police, Udaipur Range, Udaipur.
4. The Superintendent Of Police, Banswara.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Devendra Sanwalot
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
20/02/2024
1. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that the
issue raised in the present writ petition is covered by the
judgment rendered in the case of Dara Singh v. State of
Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11973/2012)
decided on 17.12.2012.
[2024:RJ-JD:8662] (2 of 3) [CW-2333/2024]
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 that 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 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. Without going into the merits of the case, the writ petition is
disposed of with direction to the petitioners to file a representation
before the competent authority of the respondents along with a
certified copy of the order instant and photo-stat copy of the
judgment in the case of Dara Singh (supra) with a period of two
weeks. .
4. In case, a representation is so addressed within the aforesaid
period, the competent authority of respondents shall decide the
same and consider petitioners' entitlement in accordance with the
law laid down in the case of Dara Singh (supra) as early as
possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks.
5. It is made clear that aforesaid direction to decide the
representation has been issued only with a view to ensure
expeditious redressal of petitioners' grievance. The same may not
[2024:RJ-JD:8662] (3 of 3) [CW-2333/2024]
be construed to be an order to decide the representation in a
particular manner.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
18-Mak/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
