Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Priyanka Rathore vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:38445) on 28 August, 2025
Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2025:RJ-JD:38445]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16270/2025
1. Priyanka Rathore D/o Shambhu Singh Rathore, Aged About 34
Years, R/o House No. 13, Laxman Nagar B Goshala Road
Nandari, Jodhpur Dist. Jodhpur At Present Posting Gsss
Utambar, Balesar, Dist. Jodhpur.
2. Rishi Ram Meena S/o Dhan Phool Meena, Aged About 37
Years, R/o Makanpur Chaube, Dist. Karauli, At Present Posting
Gsss Juna Mitha Kheda, Block Sindhari, Dist. Balotra.
3. Dheeraj Kumar Meena S/o Ramesh Kumar Meena, Aged About
34 Years, R/o Ward No. 5, Meena Ka Mohalla Village Holya Ka
Bas Post Kotri-Simarla, Tehsil Shrimadhopur Dist. Sikar, At
Present Posting Gsss Dudwa, Block And Dist. Balotra.
4. Keshram Meena S/o Babu Lal Meena, Aged About 33 Years, R/
o Village Devsukhpura, Post Ratiyapura, Tehsil Masalpur, Dist.
Karauli, At Present Posting Gsss Khedi Ka Kheda, Block Javaja
Dist. Beawar.
5. Laxman Singh S/o Soma, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village
Agoriya, Tehsil Bagidora, Dist. Banwara, At Present Posting
Gsss Monadungar, Block Gagartalai, Dist. Banswara.
6. Gauri Chaturvedi D/o Nagendra Nath Chaturvedi, Aged About
58 Years, R/o Tabela Road Kayasth Mohalla Jhalawar, Dist.
Jhalawar, At Present Posting Gsss Mandana, Dist. Kota.
7. Madan Lal S/o Shankar Lal, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Ward
No. 19 Adresh Chowk Anupgarh, Dist. Shri Ganganagar At
Present Posting Gsss Habaspura, Sambhar Lake, Jaipur.
----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 Joint Director, Secondary Education, Jodhpur, District
Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
4. The Joint Director, Secondary Education, Ajmer, District Ajmer,
Rajasthan.
5. The Joint Director, Secondary Education Udaipur, District
Udaipur, Rajasthan.
6. The Joint Director, Secondary Education, Kota, District Kota,
(Downloaded on 28/08/2025 at 09:54:26 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:38445] (2 of 3) [CW-16270/2025]
Rajasthan.
7. The Joint Director, Secondary Education, Jaipur, District Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Rajpurohit for Mr. TS Rathore
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Order
28/08/2025
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner 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). He submits that the petitioner would be satisfied if the
respondents are directed to decide the representation of the petitioner
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, along with 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:38445] (3 of 3) [CW-16270/2025]
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 petitioner 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. The order has been passed based on the submissions made in the
petition and by learned counsel for the petitioner 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
petitioner.
5. It is made clear that aforesaid direction to decide there
presentation has been issued only with a view to ensure expeditious
redressal of petitioner's grievance. The same may not be construed to
be an order to decide the representation in a particular manner.
6. Stay petition and pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(DR. NUPUR BHATI),J
surabhii/117-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
