Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Pramod Kumar Sharma vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:20187) on 25 April, 2025
Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:20187]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12901/2024
1. Pramod Kumar Sharma S/o Sh. Harish Chandra, Aged
About 39 Years, Resident Of Village Anandvasi, Vpo
Ruplisar, Tehsil Sardarsahar, District Churu.
2. Shekhar Soni S/o Sh. Kanhaiya Lal Soni, Aged About 31
Years, Resident Of Gaushala Baas, Ward No. 45,
Sardarshahar, District Churu.
3. Ramzan Khan S/o Sh. Sarwar Khan, Aged About 34 Years,
Resident Of Janana Ka Mohalla, Peethasar, Churu, District
Churu.
4. Naresh Dan Charan S/o Sh. Jagdish Dan, Aged About 39
Years, Resident Of Village Dhani Charanan, Post Jhadsart
Kandhian, Tehsil Taranagar, District Churu.
5. Pawan Kumar S/o Sh. Jag Ram, Aged About 41 Years,
Resident Of Mithi Paharsar, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu.
6. Balwant Singh S/o Sh. Bhagirath Prasad, Aged About 37
Years, Resident Of Vpo Bain, Tehsil Taranagar, District
Churu.
7. Jai Praksh Pareek S/o Sh. Bajrang Lal, Aged About 49
Years, Resident Of Vpo Jaitasar, Tehsil Bhanipura, District
Churu.
8. Naresh Kumar S/o Sh. Mani Ram, Aged About 45 Years,
Vpo Dhadhal Lekhu, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Churu.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Medical And Health Services, Govt Of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Project Director, Mukhya-Mantra Nishulk Janch Yojna
(MNJY) Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Ratangarh, District
Churu.
4. Block Chief Medical Officer, Sardarsahar, District Churu.
5. Medical Officer Incharge, Primary Health Centre, Shimla,
District Churu.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hanuman Singh Choudhary
(D.B. SAW/916/2024 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)
(Downloaded on 25/04/2025 at 11:59:00 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:20187] (2 of 4) [CW-12901/2024]
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order
25/04/2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by a
judgment rendered by this court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.12243/2024 (Shruti Moyal & Ors. V/s State of
Rajasthan & Ors.) decided on 30.07.2024 in the following
terms:-
"1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
2. The present writ petition has been filed with the following
prayers:-
"A. the action of the respondents while terminating the
services of the petitioners from the post of Assistant
Radiographer, Lab Technician and Assistant lab
Technician on the ground of availability of regularly
selected Lab Technicians despite the fact that posts are
still lying vacant, may kindly be declared per se illegal,
arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Constitution
of India.
B. The impugned orders dated 12.07.2014 (Annexure-
7) may kindly be quashed and set aside.
C. The impugned termination order of petitioner No.1
dated 10.07.2024 (Annexure-8) and order dated
10.07.2024 (Annexure-9) by which services of
petitioners No.1 have been terminated and all orders
issued by the respondents in the intervening period,
terminating the services of the petitioners, may kindly
be ordered to be quashed and set aside.
D. the respondents may kindly be directed to reinstate
the services of the petitioners and they be permitted to
continue their services on their respective post.
(D.B. SAW/916/2024 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)
[2025:RJ-JD:20187] (3 of 4) [CW-12901/2024]
E. The respondents may kindly be directed not to
replace the petitioners till the agreement of the
petitioners come to an end.
F. That the respondents may be restrained from dis-
continuing services of the petitioners and/or the
present place of posting of the petitioners may not
changed."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners were appointed on the urgent temporary basis for a
period of 3 months or till the regularly selected employees are
available with the respondent-Department, whichever is earlier.
Learned counsel submits that the regularly selected employees
are available with the respondent-Department, thus, the services
of the petitioners have been dispensed with vide order dated
10.07.2024.
4. Learned counsel further submits that after the regularly
selected persons having joined in the respondent-Department,
still there are number of vacancies available with the
respondent-Department for the post of Lab Technician and
Assistant Radiographers. He, therefore, prays that the
respondents may be directed that in case, there are vacancies
available in the Department and they are in need of services of
the petitioners, the petitioners' services can be adjusted in the
nearby areas of District Pali/Beawar.
5. Considering the limited prayer of the petitioner, the writ
petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.7-
Chief Medical and Health Officer, Beawar & respondent No.8-
Chief Medical and Health Officer, Pali to ascertain the number of
vacancies available with them in their jurisdiction and if they
desire to take the services of the petitioners on the post
available, the petitioners may be adjusted or accommodated to
serve on those posts till the regularly selected candidates are
available with the respondent-Department.
6. It is made clear that if any of the petitioner is not
discharging his duties satisfactorily, the respondents will be free
to discharge him from the employment.
7. Stay petition as well as other pending applications, if any,
shall also stand disposed of".
(D.B. SAW/916/2024 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)
[2025:RJ-JD:20187] (4 of 4) [CW-12901/2024]
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners may be permitted to file an appropriate representation
before the respondents in the light of judgment rendered by this
Court in the case of Shruti Moyal (supra) for redressal of their
grievances.
4. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of
in terms that in the event of filing a representation by the
petitioners, the same shall be considered and decided by the
respondents at the earliest preferably 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 Shruti Moyal
(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
petitioners would be entitled to the relief.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
36-/Arun P/-
(D.B. SAW/916/2024 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
