Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Bhagwan Sahay Meena vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 28 August, 2025
Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2025:RJ-JD:38420]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16259/2025
1. Bhagwan Sahay Meena S/o Chimman Lal Meena, Aged About
44 Years, R/o Ranglal Ka Pura, Tehsil And Post Todabhim
District Karauli, Presently Posted At Government Upper
Primary School Sursena Bhanakpura Todabhim, District
Karauli, Rajasthan.
2. Vijay Singh Meena S/o Hariram Meena, Aged About 50 Years,
R/o Wal Ka Pura Tehsil And Post Todabhim, District Karauli,
Presently Posted At Government Upper Primary School
Sursena Bhanakpura Todabhim, District Karauli, Rajasthan.
3. Ramesh Chand Meena S/o Bhagoti Ram Meena, Aged About 49
Years, R/o Village Nahar Khora, Post Geejgarh, Tehsil Sikrai,
District Dausa, Presently Posted At Government Upper Primary
School Anantpura Bhejeda Todabhim Karauli, Rajasthan.
4. Ramesh Chand Meena S/o Kishan Lal Meena, Aged About 52
Years, R/o Bhagtan Ka Pura Bamanwas Pati Khurd
Sawaimadhopur Presently Posted At Government Upper
Primary School Anantpura Bhejeda Todabhim Karauli,
Rajasthan.
5. Boby Lal Sahariya S/o Narayan Lal, Aged About 48 Years, R/o
Village Khankhera, Post Kelwara, Kishanganj, Baran Presently
Posted At Govt. Primary School Janakpur Balapura Baran,
Rajasthan.
6. Shobhag Chand Sahariya S/o Ghanshyam Sahariya, Aged
About 47 Years, R/o Data Mohalla Rampuriya Jageer Bansthuni
Baran, Presently Posted At Government Senior Secondary
School Bilasgar Baran, Rajasthan.
7. Ramdayal Sahariya S/o Ishwar Lal Sahariya, Aged About 46
Years, Saharana Behta, Bainta, Baran, Presently Posted At
Government Senior Secondary School, Behta Baran,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Elementary Education, Government
Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3. The District Education Officer, (Secondary Education), Karauli,
(Downloaded on 28/08/2025 at 08:43:00 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:38420] (2 of 3) [CW-16259/2025]
Rajasthan.
4. The District Education Officer, (Elementary Education), Karauli,
Rajasthan.
5. The District Education Officer, (Secondary Education), Baran,
Rajasthan.
6. The District Education Officer, (Elementary Education) Baran,
Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gajendra Singh for Mr. Balkrishan
Saini
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
[2025:RJ-JD:38420] (3 of 3) [CW-16259/2025]
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."
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/109-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
