Sunday, 17, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Anita Choudhary vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:20266)
2025 Latest Caselaw 12281 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 12281 Raj
Judgement Date : 25 April, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Anita Choudhary vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:20266) on 25 April, 2025

Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:20266]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                  S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8214/2025

1.       Anita Choudhary D/o Shri Meer Singh Choudhary, Aged
         About 38 Years, R/o Dhaka House, Indira Colony, Bikaner,
         District Bikaner, Rajasthan.
2.       Alka Bhoond W/o Shri Ramratan, Aged About 45 Years,
         R/o C-364, Karni Nagar, Lalgarh, Bikaner, District Bikaner,
         Rajasthan.
3.       Suresh Kumar Budania S/o Shri Prahlad Singh Budania,
         Aged About 40 Years, R/o Dhani Sukh Singh Ka Vas,
         Tehsil Neem Ka Thana, Mawanda Khurd, Sikar, District
         Sikar, Rajasthan.
4.       Suresh Kumar Bagra S/o Shri Omkar Mal Bagra, Aged
         About 47 Years, R/o Ward No. 5, Dhani Bagdo Ki
         Kanwarpura, Jaipur, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
5.       Sarvjeet Kaur D/o Shri Gyan Singh, Aged About 47 Years,
         R/o Ward No. 5, Suratgarh, Sriganganagar, District
         Sriganganagar, Rajasthan.
6.       Bhagwan Singh S/o Shri Devi Singh, Aged About 34
         Years,      R/o    Jatav     Basti,     Nithar,       Bharatpur,     District
         Bharatpur, Rajasthan.
                                                                      ----Petitioners
                                      Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
         Of    Education,        Government            Of      Rajasthan,     Jaipur,
         Rajasthan.
2.       The    Director,    Secondary          Education,         Bikaner,   District
         Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3.       The Secretary, Rajasthan Public Service Commission,
         Ajmer, Rajasthan.
                                                                   ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)            :    Ms. Abha Dadhich for
                                  Mr. Kailash Jangid



         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

[2025:RJ-JD:20266] (2 of 3) [CW-8214/2025]

25/04/2025

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

controversy in question rests covered by the judgment passed by

a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Jaipur in S.B. Civil Writ

Petition No.7283/2014: Manoj Khandelwal & Ors. Vs. State

of Rajasthan & Ors. (decided on 16.07.2014). She submits that

the petitioners would be satisfied if the respondents are directed

to decide the representation of the petitioners in light of the

aforesaid judgment.

2. In Manoj Khandelwal's case (supra), it was observed and

held as under:

"Having regard to the facts of the case, writ petition

is disposed of requiring the petitioners to make a

representation to respondent no.2-Director,

Secondary Education, Bikaner, alongwith a copy of

this order, who shall, after verifying the facts stated

above, consider and decide the same by a speaking

order within a period of three months from the date

of its making, addressing the grievance of the

petitioners for extending them the relief as prayed

for, as the candidates, who stood lower in merit, are

getting benefit of higher pay, seniority, annual grade

increments and other service benefits including the

selection scales. If the respondent no.2 decides to

place the petitioners above in seniority than the

candidates who stood lower in merit, then the

petitioners would be entitled to all benefits of

seniority but they would be entitled only to notional

benefits."

[2025:RJ-JD:20266] (3 of 3) [CW-8214/2025]

3. In view of the submission made, the present writ petition is

disposed of with a direction to the competent

authority/respondents to decide the representation of the

petitioners if filed within a period of fifteen days from now. The

representation be decided within a period of six weeks thereafter

in accordance with law and keeping in view the observations made

in the case of Manoj Khandelwal (supra).

4. 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.

5. The order has been passed based on the submissions made

in the petition and by learned counsel for the petitioners before

this Court. 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, appropriate

orders would be passed in favour of the petitioners.

6. Stay petition and pending applications, if any, stand disposed

of.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J C-11-10-SunilS/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter