[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Janakraj Singh And Ors vs State Education And Ors ... on 9 December, 2025
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur, Anand Sharma
[2025:RJ-JD:53435-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11487/2011
1. Janakraj Singh S/o Shri Gora Lal, aged about 55 years, R/o
Ward No.7, Behind Ware House Sangaria, District Hanumangarh
2. Amarjeet Singh S/o Shri Niranjan Singh, R/o 1/746, Ward
No.5, Near Canal Colony, Sangaria, District Hanumangarh
3. Bhim Sen, S/o Shri Lekh Ram, R/o Shani Mandir Gali,
Sangaria, District Hanumangarh
4. Kana Ram S/o Shri Gordhan Ram, R/o Village Shergarh, P.O.
Manaksar, Teshil Sangaria, District Hanumangarh
5. Harashvinder Singh S/o Shri Hakam Singh, R/o Ward No.7,
Behind Ware House, Sangaria, District Hanumangarh
`----Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan through the Principal Secretary School &
Sankrit Education, Secretariat Rajasthan, Jaipur
2. District Education Officer (Secondary), Hanumangarh, District
Hanumangarh
3. Kishan Shahid Smarak Senior Higher Secondary School,
Sangaria, District Hanumangarh through its Managing
Committee,
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. H.S. Sidhu
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Mehali Mehta for Mr. Sajjan Singh
Rathore, AAG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA
Order
09/12/2025
1 Learned counsel for the parties submit that controversy
involved in the instant writ petition has already been decided in
identical matters by Coordinate Bench vide order dated
09.02.2018 passed in D.B. Special Appeal Writ Nos.245/2011
(Durga Das Singh Rajvi and Ors. Vs State & Ors.) and 93/2011
(Uploaded on 11/12/2025 at 10:33:20 AM)
[2025:RJ-JD:53435-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-11487/2011]
(Ravi Shankar Srivastava & Ors.) and therefore the present writ
petition may also be decided in the same terms.
2. While deciding both the appeals, learned Coordinate Bench
passed following order:-
"1. The lead judgment being in S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.73/2011 Ravi Shankar Srivastav & Ors. vs. State of
Rajasthan & Ors., learned counsel for the parties state that
the four appeals may be decided in the light of the pleadings
in the said writ petition.
2. Prayers made in the writ petition read as follows:-
"(a) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, in the
nature thereof, the impugned Notification dated
29.11.2010, containing the Rajasthan Voluntary Rural
Education Service Rules, 2010 (Annexure-1), may
kindly be interfered by this Hon'ble High Court and
consequently the impugned and discriminatory
provisions in Rule 2 (g), 4 (1) and 5 of the Rules of
2010 may kindly be declared ultra vires the constitution
of India and be struck down accordingly.
(b) Or by an appropriate writ, order or direction in the
nature thereof, the line provided in the Rule 2 (g)of the
Rules of 2010 as "who is working against aided and
sanctioned post" and so also the line contained in Rule
4 (1) and 5 of the Rules of 2010 stating as "who are
working against sanctioned and aided post on the date
of commencement of these rules" may kindly be
ordered to be deleted and be substituted and the Rules
of 2010, may kindly be made application to all the
employees, working against aided, non-aided or
management cadre posts, so as to provide them
opportunity equal opportunity of employment under the
Rules of 2010.
(c) Or by an appropriate writ, order or direction in the
nature thereof, the respondent government(Directorate
of Non-Government Educational Institutions) and the
respondent School Management, may kindly be
directed to set out the mondalities, to absorb or
regularize appointment of petitioners against aided
posts and to provide regular pay scales to petitioners,
(Uploaded on 11/12/2025 at 10:33:20 AM)
[2025:RJ-JD:53435-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-11487/2011]
at par as are admissible to government teachers or
teachers working against sanctioned aided posts in
Non-Government Educational Institutions."
3. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ
petition qua the first two prayers made; giving reason that
employees of aided educational institutions who were
appointed against aided and sanctioned post form a different
and distinct class vis-a-vis those who were employed by
Educational Institutions against no sanction post and
needless to state no aid sanctioned.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a
Divisional Bench of this Court has taken similar view and
therefore the appeals may be dismissed. However regarding
prayer 'C' made in the writ petition which appears not to
have been argued before the learned Single Judge, he
requests that right of the appellant to approach the Non
Government Educational Institution Tribunal be reserved.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection.
6. Thus, dismissing the appeals we observe that as
regards prayer 'C' in the writ petition the appellant may
approach the Tribunal for necessary relief."
Thus, considering the submissions made by counsel for both
the parties, the present writ petition is also dismissed in the same
terms.
(ANAND SHARMA),J (VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
76-Sudhir/-
(Uploaded on 11/12/2025 at 10:33:20 AM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
