Vinod Kumar (Belt No. 242) vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:39225)
2024 Latest Caselaw 8332 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Vinod Kumar (Belt No. 242) vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:39225) on 21 September, 2024

Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur

Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur

[2024:RJ-JD:39225]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15527/2024

Vinod Kumar (Belt No. 242) S/o Shri Jaswant Singh, Aged About
37 Years, R/o Chak 11 F Bada Village And Post Mirjewala, Tehsil
And Distt. Sri Ganganagar (Raj.).
                                                                          ----Petitioner
                                         Versus
1.       State       Of   Rajasthan,         Through         Its      Home   Secretary,
         Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.).
2.       Director General Of Police, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3.       Inspector General Of Police, (Bikaner Range), Bikaner,
         Rajasthan.
4.       Superintendent Of Police, Sri Ganganagar, (Raj.).
                                                                       ----Respondents


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



         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

21/09/2024

1. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the

issue raised in the present writ petition is covered by the

judgment in Dara Singh vs. 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.

[2024:RJ-JD:39225] (2 of 2) [CW-15527/2024]

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. Learned counsel, therefore, prays that the petitioner may be

permitted to file a detailed representation before the competent

authorities for redressal of his grievances.

4. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of

with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation to the

competent authorities of the department and the competent

authorities of the department are directed to decide the same

within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of such

representation, keeping in mind the law laid down by this Court in

the case of Dara Singh(supra).

5. 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 petitioner

would be entitled to the relief.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 35-SunilS/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)