Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Ganga Singh vs State Of Rajasthan on 5 February, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:7754]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3804/2024

Rajesh Sharma S/o Shri Ramesh Chandra Sharma, Aged About
48 Years, R/o 3/353/ Rajasthan Housing Board Colony,
Goverdhan Vilas, Sector 14, Saweena (Rural), Po Udaipur H
Magri, District Udaipur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Panchayati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan,
Jaipur
2. Principal Secretary, Women And Child Development
Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. Director, Integrated Child Development Services,
Rajasthan, Women And Child Development Department,
Jaipur.
4. Additional Director (Administration), Integrated Child
Development Services, Rajasthan, Women And Child
Development Department, Jaipur.
5. Deputy Director, Integrated Child Development
Services, Rajasthan, Women And Child Development
Department, Udaipur.
----Respondents
Along with connected matters

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mukesh Rajpurohit, Mr. R.S.
Choudhary, Mr. Rishabh Tayal, Mr.
Yashpal Khileree, Mr. Manoj Bohra, Mr.
R.C. Joshi, Mr. Kshitij Vyas, Mr.
Deepak Nehra, Mr. Narpat Singh, Mr.
Manish Patel, Mr. Vikas Bijarnia, Mr.
Sushil Solanki, Mr. Ripudaman Singh,
Mr. A.D. Ujjwal, Mr. Kapil Purohit, Mr.
Manoj Kumar, Mr. D.K. Ojha, Mr.G.R.
Bhari, Mr. O.P. Sangwa, Mr. D.K.
Godara, Mr. R.S. Champawat, Mr.
Pankaj Kumar Gupta, Mr. Shankar
Dayal, Mr. Bharat Shrimali, Mr. Rajat
Arora, Mr. Ashok Singh, Mr. Sandeep
Kalwania, Mr. V.S. Bhawla, Mr. R.P.
Singaria, Mr. Vivek Firoda, Mr. J.S.

(Downloaded on 10/02/2025 at 09:32:30 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:7754] (2of 17) [CW-3804/2024]

Bhaleria, Mr. Kunal Upadhyay,
Mr. K.R. Saharan, Mr. Jogendra Singh,
Mr. Pradeep Kumar Paliwal, Mr.
Manjeet Godara, Mr. Vinod Jhajharia,
Mr. Hapu Ram, Mr. H.S. Sidhu, Ms.
Tanya Mehta, Mr. B.R. Chahar, Dr.
Rohit Kaswan, Mr. R.C. Bishnoi, Mr.
P.K. Rawla and Mr. S.S. Choudhary.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Rajpurohit, AAG with
Mr. Deepak Bora, AGC & Ms. Rakhi
Choudhary
Mr. I.R. Choudhary, AAG with
Mr. Pawan Bharti
Dr. Praveen Khandelwal, AAG with
Ms. Yashvi Khandelwal
Mr. Mukesh Dave, AGC with
Mr. Tanuj Jain
Mr. Subhash Choudhary
Mr. Nitesh Mathur
Mr. Kuldeep Vaishnav

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

Order (Oral)

05/02/2025

1. Vide 73rd Amendment to the Constitution of India, the

Panchayati Raj Institution was significantly empowered by bringing

29 vital departments, as listed in the 11th Schedule, under its

jurisdiction. In furtherance of the said constitutional mandate, the

Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department, Rajasthan

took an administrative decision to transfer certain activities,

including financial resources and personnel, from the earlier

respective departments to the Panchayati Raj Department. For

smooth devolution of power, the State of Rajasthan also enacted

the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Transferred Activities) Rules, 2011,

envisaging legal framework governing the transfer of State

Government employees. Notably, Rule 8 of these rules explicitly

stipulates the mode and manner of the transfer of employees.

(Downloaded on 10/02/2025 at 09:32:30 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:7754] (3of 17) [CW-3804/2024]

2. In all the petitions, as per Appendix A, B and C of the instant

order, common assertion is that not only the transfers of

petitioners are in mechanical exercise of mind but also in blatant

non-compliance of applicable Rules. Facts of individual cases are

thus not being gone into, as what is under challenge herein

simplicitor is the procedure, legality and the administrative

propriety of the transfers/postings of the petitioners. Vide this

common order, all the Appendix [(A) to (C)], ibid are being

disposed of as similar issues are involved therein.

3. First and foremost, reference may be had to Rajasthan

Panchayati Raj (Transferred Activities) Rules, 2011 (for short 2011

Rules), in particular Rule 8 thereof, which reads as under:-

"8. Transfer -
Transfer of such transferred employees shall be made under the
transfer policy and directions issued by the State Government
from time to time, by:-

i. the Administration and Establishment Committee of the
Panchayat Samiti concerned within the same Panchayat
Samiti.

ii. the Administration Establishment Committee of the Zila
Parisad concerned from one Panchayat Samiti to
another Panchayat Samiti within the same District.

iii. the department concerned from one district to another
district with the consent of the Panchayati Raj
Department."

Non compliance of sub rule (ii) and/or (iii), ibid is complained

by the petitioners.

4. Some of the petitioners also allege violation of Rule 31 of the

Rajasthan Scheduled Areas Subordinate, Ministerial and Class-IV

Service (Recruitment and other Service Conditions) Rules, 2014

(Downloaded on 10/02/2025 at 09:32:30 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:7754] (4of 17) [CW-3804/2024]

(2014 Rules). The said rule, for ready reference, is also

reproduced hereinbelow:-

"31. Appointment to the service.-
Appointment to post(s) in the Service by direct recruitment or by
promotion, as the case may be, shall be made by the Appointing
Authority on occurrence of substantive vacancies from the
candidates selected under rule 25 in order of merit and by
promotion from the persons selected under rule 29 of these
rules. The persons so appointed shall be transferable from one
place to the other within the Scheduled Areas irrespective of the
place of appointment taking the entire Scheduled Area as a Unit
i.e. the entire Scheduled Area shall be the closed cadre. When a
person so appointed cannot be transferred out side this closed
cadre in any capacity which also includes deputation & reverse
deputation."

5. Effectively thus, the bunch of petitions herein can be

segregated into three categories, i.e.:-

(A) Those, where the petitioners (Appendix-A) are
aggrieved by alleged violation of Rule 8 (ii) of the Rules
of 2011, ibid contending that the District Establishment
Committee of the ZilaSamiti has not passed the order
while transferring them from one Panchayat Samiti to
another within the same District.

(B) Where (Appendix-B) petitioners are aggrieved with
alleged violation of Rule 8(iii) of the Rules of 2011, ibid,
stating that consent of Panachayati Raj department has
not been taken.

(C) Where, apart from alleged violation of Rule 8 of the
Rules of 2011, transfers have been carried out either
from TSP Area to Non-TSP Area or vice versa averring
non compliance of Rule 31 of the Rules of 2014.
(Appendix-C).

6. First category of petitioners pertain to Rule 8(ii). A perusal of

the transfer orders clearly reveals that the same have been

passed by an authority, who lacks the administrative competence.

Rule 8(ii) of the Rules of 2011, in no uncertain terms, states that

(Downloaded on 10/02/2025 at 09:32:30 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:7754] (5of 17) [CW-3804/2024]

in case of transfer of an employee from one Panchayat Samiti to

another Panchayat Samiti within the same district, the authority

competent to pass such an order is District Establishment

Committee of Zilla Prishad. There is no quibble about the

proposition that sub rule (ii) is mandatory in nature. None has

argued that interpretation of Sub Rule (ii) is to be such that it is

directory and nor, in any case, that is the position in law, as is

borne out from the bare reading of the Rule, ibid.

7. As an upshot, the impugned transfer orders in the bunch of

petitions in Appendix (A) have since concededly not been passed

by respective District Establishment Committees, the same are set

aside. Liberty is however given to the respondents to pass fresh

orders by complying with the statutory mandate, if administrative

exigency so warrants.

8. Adverting now to the second category of the petitioners as

per Appendix-B i.e. the ones who are alleging violation of Rule

8(iii) of the Rules of 2011, i.e., no consent from the Panchayati Raj

Department has been obtained. Argument in unison, by all the

learned counsel representing the petitioners, is that consent so

envisaged has to be prior and in writing. Lack thereof, vitiates the

transfer orders and, therefore, same ought to be set aside.

9. In fact, at the very out set, it is pertinent to note that the

aforesaid controversy is no more res integra. Suffice it would be

reproduce relevant extract of judgment rendered by a Division

Bench of this Court in the case of State Of Rajasthan Versus

Rekha Kumari : D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 284/2022, decided

on 17.08.2022:-

(Downloaded on 10/02/2025 at 09:32:30 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:7754] (6of 17) [CW-3804/2024]

"6. It is noteworthy from the affidavit that as per the
distribution of Departments amongst the Cabinet of Ministers,
Shri Parsadi Lal Meena, the Minister for Medical and Health
Services, Government of Rajasthan has been given independent
charge of Medical and Health Services under the Panchayati
Raj Department.
7. After obtaining legal opinion and referring to the
Division Bench judgment in the case of Mool Shankar (supra),
the file was moved for grant of ex-post facto sanction to validate
the transfer orders passed earlier by the Medical and Health
Department. The Departmental officers proposed issuance of
expost facto sanction and the Minister Shri Meena has
approved the said proposal on 21.03.2022.
8. As a consequence of the above development, we are of the
view that the Panchayati Raj Department has lawfully granted
ex-post facto sanction as per the requirement of Rule 8 of the
Rules of 2011 to validate the questioned transfer orders.
9. It was the fervent contention of the learned counsel for
the respondent employees that ex-post facto consent does not
relate to the transfer orders at hand because the date mentioned
in the office note is 22.11.2021. This contention is not tenable
for the simple reason that this date refers to the distribution of
departments amongst the Ministers, whereby independent
charge of Medical and Health Services coming under the
purview of Panchayati Raj Department was assigned to Shri
Parsadi Lal Meena, the Minister for Medical and Health
Services. As is evident from the note-sheets annexed with the
additional affidavit, both the Departments have concurred on
the transfers, which are subject matter of challenge in this
litigation. The action so taken is compliant of the view taken by
the Division Bench in the case of Mool Shankar (supra) and
hence, the requirement of consent of the Panchayati Raj
Department for effecting transfers of the transferred employees
of the Panchayati Raj Department has been satisfied."
(emphasis supplied)

Significantly, what has thus been held is that once the

consent of Panhayati Raj department is there, be it pre or post ex

facto, the requirement of compliance of Rule 8(iii) stands satisfied.

10. Similar opinion has recently been further enunciated by in

the case of State Of Rajasthan Vs. Aakashdeep Poonia :D.B.

Spl. Appl. Writ No. 799/2024, decided on 20.09.2024, wherein

(Downloaded on 10/02/2025 at 09:32:30 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:7754] (7of 17) [CW-3804/2024]

speaking for the Division Bench, my learned brother Shree

Chandrashekhar, J. observed/held as under:-

"4. In our opinion, the apprehension expressed by the learned
Additional Advocate General is unfounded. This has never
been in the realm of any doubt that a decision by the Court
governs the parties to the litigation except in very exceptional
kind of cases where the Court itself directed extending benefits
to similarly situated persons. In our opinion, the observations
made by the learned Single Judge regarding post facto
approval dated 16th March 2024 accorded by the Department
of Agriculture and Panchayati Raj shall not affect transfer of
the other persons in the transfer order dated 22nd February
2024. This is too well known that transfer of any employee is a
policy decision which sometimes is taken in the administrative
exigencies. The Court shall have no power to interfere with the
order of transfer unless it is demonstrated before the Court that
the transfer order was without jurisdiction or contrary to the
extant Rules. Mr. Indra Raj Choudhary, the learned Additional
Advocate General has drawn attention of this Court to the
judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in D.B.
Special Appeal Writ No.284 of 2022 titled as "State of
Rajasthan v. Rekha Kumari" with analogous matters. We
accord our concurrence to the judgment in "Rekha Kumari"
which also indicates that post facto approval granted by the
Department would suffice and save the transfer order even if
the same was issued without taking prior approval as
mandated under clause (iii) of Rule 8 of Rajasthan Panchayati
Raj (Tansferred Activities) Rules, 2011."

11. In the light of above, I am unable to persuade myself with

the arguments being canvassed on behalf of the petitioners.

Moreover, learned counsels appearing for the respondents have

brought the official administrative note-sheet in the Court. A

perusal of the same clearly reveals that the transfer file was

moved at different levels inter-se department of Medical & Health

and Panchayati Raj Department and both the administrative

Secretaries, i.e. Medical & Health Department and Panchayati Raj

Department, concur on the proposal of the transfers including the

Hon'ble Minister who is holding charge of both the departments.

(Downloaded on 10/02/2025 at 09:32:31 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:7754] (8of 17) [CW-3804/2024]

12. No doubt, the approval of the Secretary of Panchayati Raj

Department is ex-post facto but the same per-se does not vitiate

the requirement of seeking consent in terms of Rule 8(iii) of the

Rules of 2011. The compliance envisaged in Rule 8(iii) of the Rules

of 2011 does not necessarily have to be prior to passing of the

orders. Many a time, the administrative exigencies are such that

based on verbal deliberation, administrative orders are passed,

subject of course to the post-facto written approval.

13. As long as the compliance has been carried out, be it pre or

ex-post facto, no interference is warranted. Accordingly, the bunch

of petitions contained in Appendix (B) are dismissed. However, if,

in certain individual cases in this set of petitions, ex-post facto

approval has not been obtained, the respondents shall do the

needful within a period of 30 days of passing of the instant order.

14. Let us now deal with the cases where transfers have been

carried out either from TSP Area to Non-TSP Area or vice versa, in

the teeth of Rule 31 ibid. My attention has been drawn to foot-

note (7) of the impugned order, which is self speaking. It, in no

uncertain terms, envisages that those of the transferred officials

who can provide proof of their belonging to the scheduled area

(but have been sent to outside the said scheduled area) will not

be transferred upon furnishing of the same. However, the time

period qua the needful exercise has been left open ended.

15. Accordingly, since the respondents themselves concede in

the impugned transfer orders itself, that those who have been sent

out of the assigned scheduled area, their transfer orders will be

revisited, I am of the view that no adjudication is warranted qua

(Downloaded on 10/02/2025 at 09:32:31 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:7754] (9of 17) [CW-3804/2024]

alleged violation of Rule 31. However, the respondents are

directed that upon the petitioners approaching them within 7 days

with the proof of their belonging to a particular scheduled area, in

case it is so found that they have indeed been transferred outside

their scheduled area, they shall then pass fresh remedial orders

within a period of 30 days thereafter.

16. All the writ petitions mentioned in Appendix (C) are

accordingly disposed of. Till the passing of the fresh orders, as

above, the interim orders operating in favour of the petitioners,

shall continue to enure to their benefit.

17. In the parting, I may also hasten to add that the approval

does not have to be necessarily conveyed to the concerned

transferee official. The entire intent of approval being that the

Panchayati Raj Department is not kept in dark and, there is a

certain transparency, which is envisaged under the constitutional

scheme which led to enactment of Panchayati Raj Act read with

Rules framed therein.

18. Conversely, in case the Panchayati Raj Department does not

approve of the transfer, in that event, the concerned employee is

entitled to have the said information and it shall then be conveyed

in writing, both to the department where the services of such

official(s) has/have been deputed as well as to the concerned

official(s) so as to enable him/them to seek appropriate remedy in

accordance with law.

19. There is another aspect of the matter, i.e. many transferred

employees have voiced deep distress over the severe hardships

imposed upon them by mass transfer orders with no application of

(Downloaded on 10/02/2025 at 09:32:31 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:7754] (10of 17) [CW-3804/2024]

mind, what so ever. The haste in which it has been done is

absolutely without consideration of their genuine difficulties or

even affording them a chance to present them. These abrupt

decisions have upended their lives in complete disregard of the

struggle they would to face. To that extent, I am of the view that

certain indulgence is warranted so as to not leave them remediless

altogether.

20. Illustratively, in SBCWP Nos.3804/2024 and 3588/2024, the

petitioners have been transferred 700 kms. Away and given the

meager salaries, which they are earning, they can ill-afford to

relocate themselves within the financial constraints. On the other

hand, to maintain two dwelling units, is also completely

impractical apart from resulting in hardship to the entire family.

21. Likewise, in SBCWP No.2118/2025, petitioner as well as his

spouse, are both the Government employees. In SBCWP

No.1661/2025, the petitioner is slated to retire in July, 2026 and

seeks quashing of his transfer on the additional ground of violation

of Division Bench judgment rendered in Dr. (Smt.) Pushpa

Mehta Vs. Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal &

Ors. Reported in 2001(1) RLR 398. In SBCWP No.1976/2025,

mother of the petitioner is suffering from Cancer as well as she

herself is undergoing matrimonial discord with her husband, which

has resulted into registration of criminal case by her against her

husband at the current place of hearing posting and her transfer

would thus result in an extreme hardship in travel and health to

attend the court hearing apart from resulting disruption of medical

treatment to her mother.

(Downloaded on 10/02/2025 at 09:32:31 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:7754] (11of 17) [CW-3804/2024]

22. In SBCWP No.6209/2024 and 6214/2024, the transfer was

directed for a limited period of 100 days to meet administrative

exigency, which, in any case, owing to the interim orders passed

by this Court, is long over and thus, the competent authority may

have to re-visit the decision.

23. In SBCWP No.2359/2025, it seems to be again a case where

the slated date of retirement is 31.05.2026, yet it has gone

unnoticed by the competent authority while passing the transfer

order, apart from the petitioner herself being cancer patient.

Similar is a case at SBCWP No.2976/2025 where once again it is

stated that the petitioner is a cancer patient.

24. The circumstances highlighted above serve as a glaring

example of the reckless haste with which transfer orders are being

passed, reducing the process to a mere mechanical exercise

devoid of any consideration for the affected employees. Such an

arbitrary approach cannot be countenanced, to say the least. The

competent authority must ensure that transferred employees are

given a fair chance to present their case, especially when

extenuating circumstances exist--be it terminal illness,

widowhood, divorce, extreme relocation hardships, imminent

superannuation, or maternity-related pre or post-natal challenges.

In these deserving cases, anything short of a humane and

compassionate approach would be a grave injustice. Thus, in the

deserving cases humanitarian outlook must be adopted.

25. Reverting to the present bunch, only the writ petitions, which

have been specifically mentioned in the foregoing part of this

paragraph, the competent authority shall not implement the

(Downloaded on 10/02/2025 at 09:32:31 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:7754] (12of 17) [CW-3804/2024]

transfer orders qua those petitioners for a period of 30 days and

make an endeavor to ascertain the work exigencies as an

alternative place of posting and either in the same district or in

the vicinity thereof so as to enable them to commute on daily

basis.

26. At this stage, learned counsels appearing for the

respondents, submit that passing of the fresh orders requires prior

sanction from the competent authority in view of the ban imposed

by the Chief Secretary vide an administrative order dated

03.01.2024. In view thereof, in order to obviate any procedural

hurdle, it is made clear that since the transfer orders have been

put on hold by mandamus of this Court, thus taking fresh

administrative decision qua the petitioners shall be construed to

be in continuation of the earlier transfer orders. No prior sanction

would thus be required in terms of the circular dated 03.01.2024

issued by the Chief Secretary.

27. The entire bunch of petitions is disposed of as above.

28. All pending application (s), shall also stand disposed of.

(ARUN MONGA),J
119-Jitendra/skm/-

Whether fit for reporting : Yes / No

Appendix 'A'

S.No. Writ Petition Party Name
Number
1. 3126/2025 Vimla STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
2. 5860/2024 Surendra Devasi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
3. 6209/2024 Dr. Naveen Kumar Bairwa STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

(Downloaded on 10/02/2025 at 09:32:31 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:7754] (13of 17) [CW-3804/2024]

4. 1712/2025 Vinod Kumari STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
5. 1818/2025 Santosh STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
6. 1820/2025 Sarika Verma STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
7. 1861/2025 Sunil Kumar Dhakar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
8. 1896/2025 Veena Meena STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
9. 1897/2025 Manju Khargawat STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
10. 2065/2025 Kishanlal Patel STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
11. 2104/2025 Khuman Singh Maida STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
12. 2168/2025 Dr. Suryaveer Singh STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
13. 2416/2025 Chanda Devi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
14. 2445/2025 Sunita Gurjar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
15. 2489/2025 Sushil Kumar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
16. 3437/2025 Sangeeta Garasiya STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
17. 1432/2025 Suman STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
18. 1635/2025 Ashok Kumar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
19. 2371/2025 Rehana Bano STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
20. 2389/2025 Shakuntla STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
21. 2441/2025 Geeta Devi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
22. 2524/2025 Saroj Budania STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
23. 2579/2025 Rajulal Gurjar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
24. 2633/2025 Praveen Kumar Manat STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
25. 2733/2025 Nirmala Devi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
26. 2846/2025 Satyendra Kumar Meena STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
27. 2874/2025 Deepak Kumawat STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
28. 3018/2025 Savitri STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
29. 3040/2025 Roshni Devi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

Appendix 'B'

S.No. Writ Petition Party Name
Number
30. 3804/2024 Rajesh Sharma STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
31. 3588/2024 Vipul Joshi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
32. 6214/2024 Dr. Kailash Chander STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
Saraswat
33. 944/2025 Surendra Kumar Poonia STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
34. 1661/2025 Dr. Ashvini Kumar Maurya STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
35. 1666/2025 Surendra Kumar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
36. 1667/2025 Narendra Kumar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
37. 1671/2025 Ramniwas STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
38. 1676/2025 Sunil Kumar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

(Downloaded on 10/02/2025 at 09:32:31 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:7754] (14of 17) [CW-3804/2024]

39. 1727/2025 Chetna Rajput STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
40. 1729/2025 Naval Singh Meena STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
41. 1757/2025 Ramawatar Meghwal STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
42. 1759/2025 Vinod Kumar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
43. 1761/2025 Rajkumar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
44. 1763/2025 Manoj Suhalka STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
45. 1779/2025 Om Prakash Tard STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
46. 1787/2025 Hanuman Ram Jalwaniya STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
47. 1788/2025 Kamlesh Kumari STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
48. 1795/2025 Basanti Patel STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
49. 1806/2025 Kanta Rawat STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
50. 1815/2025 Ganga Singh STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
51. 1819/2025 Sumitra STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
52. 1848/2025 Poonama Ram STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
53. 1850/2025 Sunita STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
54. 1865/2025 Devendra Choudhary STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
55. 1866/2025 Pradeep Kumar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
56. 1910/2025 Nathulal Machar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
57. 1912/2025 Jyoti Saharan STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
58. 1929/2025 Mukesh Daukiya STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
59. 1932/2025 Bhaira Ram Godara STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
60. 1976/2025 Kajal STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
61. 1990/2025 Bhagwati Dangi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
62. 2013/2025 Poonam Kumari STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
63. 2026/2025 Gurmeet Singh STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
64. 2047/2025 Laxmi Meena STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
65. 2059/2025 Pavan Kumar Pargi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
66. 2061/2025 Pushpa Kharadi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
67. 2070/2025 Yogesh Pargi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
68. 2073/2025 Santo Lal Roat STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
69. 2079/2025 Naresh Kumar Kharadi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
70. 2096/2025 Mukand Ram STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
71. 2097/2025 Manju Kumari STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
72. 2111/2025 Sandeep Kumar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
73. 2118/2025 Shiv Kumar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
74. 2122/2025 Vasim Khan STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
75. 2124/2025 Nitu Pargi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
76. 2125/2025 Arjun Khadda STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
77. 2149/2025 Narpat Singh STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
78. 2180/2025 Snehalata Dave STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
79. 2196/2025 Suresh Kumar Dhaka STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

(Downloaded on 10/02/2025 at 09:32:31 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:7754] (15of 17) [CW-3804/2024]

80. 2206/2025 Parmod Kumari STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

81. 2231/2025 Partapa Ram STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

82. 2233/2025 Sarla Choudhary STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

83. 2250/2025 Rita Kumari STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
84. 2254/2025 Sudarshana STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

85. 2262/2025 Darshana Kumari STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

86. 2264/2025 Chandrakala Doot STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
87. 2274/2025 Prithvi Raj Singh STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
88. 2280/2025 Ram Pratap Godara STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
89. 2288/2025 Kanhaiya Lal STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

90. 2290/2025 Kailash Chandra Goswami STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
91. 2293/2025 Ram Kumar Bhadu STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
92. 2297/2025 Bhea Ram STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

93. 2299/2025 Ajay Singh STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

94. 2302/2025 Bharat Kumar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

95. 2306/2025 Ramnivas Choudhary STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
96. 2307/2025 Imilal Rojh STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
97. 2310/2025 Ravi Kumar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

98. 2315/2025 Kanta Kumari STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

99. 2319/2025 Shankar Lal Bijarnia STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

100. 2321/2025 Vikas Jandu STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

101. 2324/2025 Ugarsen STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

102. 2327/2025 Satpal STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
103. 2334/2025 Sahab Ram STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
104. 2337/2025 Kisturi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
105. 2428/2025 Rajbala STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
106. 2431/2025 Vidhya Devi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

107. 2443/2025 Devendra Saini STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
108. 2449/2025 Suman Kaswa STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
109. 2453/2025 Kiran STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

110. 2493/2025 Sudarshan Raigar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

111. 2526/2025 Surender Kumar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
112. 2528/2025 Het Ram STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
113. 2530/2025 Kamlesh Kumari STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

114. 2539/2025 Pushpa Kumari STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

115. 2604/2025 Vijaylakshmi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

116. 2610/2025 Nirmala Sharma STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
117. 2676/2025 Richa Banshiwal STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

(Downloaded on 10/02/2025 at 09:32:31 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:7754] (16of 17) [CW-3804/2024]

118. 2552/2025 Sajjan Kaur STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
119. 2170/2025 Sharda Devi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
120. 2186/2025 Raju Ram Godara STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
121. 2314/2025 Kuldeep Singh STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

122. 2359/2025 Sushila Devi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
123. 2439/2025 Ramrati STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
124. 2513/2025 Babli Poonia STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

125. 2514/2025 Subhita STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

126. 2519/2025 Karan Singh STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
127. 2522/2025 Angrej Singh STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
128. 2533/2025 Mahendra Kaur STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
129. 2540/2025 Meena Upadhyay STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

130. 2546/2025 Anguri STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

131. 2551/2025 Shakuntla Devi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

132. 2554/2025 Anita Saran STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

133. 2593/2025 Sunil Kumar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
134. 2638/2025 Urmila Devi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
135. 2643/2025 Rajbala STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

136. 2645/2025 Rajbala STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

137. 2663/2025 Nitin Tolambiya STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
138. 2711/2025 Satish Katija STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

139. 2713/2025 Ramavatar Dhboi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

140. 2726/2025 Inderjeet Singh STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

141. 2727/2025 Ramesh Chandra Meena STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

142. 2749/2025 Krishan Lal STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

143. 2774/2025 Mahendra Bhargava STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

144. 2794/2025 Dr. Rajan Choudhary STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

145. 2800/2025 Rakesh Jeengar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

146. 2944/2025 Mahendra @ Mahendra STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
Saini
147. 2848/2025 Manga Ram Choudhary STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
148. 2853/2025 Ram Singh Bhabhor STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

149. 2948/2025 Manisha Kanwar Rathore STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

150. 2956/2025 Kiran Devi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
151. 2960/2025 Sunita Bai STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
152. 2962/2025 Hari Babu Meena STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

153. 2974/2025 Sunita Kumari STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

(Downloaded on 10/02/2025 at 09:32:31 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:7754] (17of 17) [CW-3804/2024]

154. 2976/2025 Anguri Devi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
155. 3015/2025 Vikram Singh Yadav STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

156. 3027/2025 Saraswati STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

157. 3029/2025 Santosh Bai STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
158. 3041/2025 Vinod Kumar Bairwa STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
159. 3042/2025 Mukesh Kumari STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

160. 3046/2025 Anita Pareek STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

161. 3047/2025 Mahendra Ram STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
162. 3055/2025 Satyanarayan STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
163. 3062/2025 Satpal Singh Maan STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
164. 3067/2025 Devilal STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
165. 3191/2025 Rajesh Bugasara STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

166. 3204/2025 Sitaram Dara STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

Appendix 'C'

S.No. Writ Petition Party Name
Number
167. 1793/2025 Kishan Lal STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
168. 1849/2025 Praghya Patidar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
169. 2046/2025 Kailash Kumari STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
170. 2055/2025 Shahud Khan STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
171. 2060/2025 Natwar Lal STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
172. 2063/2025 Savita Kumari Meena STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
173. 2066/2025 Rakesh Kumar Khat STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
174. 2235/2025 Sushila Yadav STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
175. 2763/2025 Faruk Mohammed STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
176. 2016/2025 Seema Pargi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
177. 2187/2025 Urmila Kumari Pargi STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
178. 2189/2025 Sheela Masar STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
179. 2223/2025 Shankar Lal Yadav STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
180. 2236/2025 Dinesh Chandra Ninama STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
181. 2240/2025 Urmila Kumari STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.
182. 2492/2025 Santosh Dhaka STATE OF RAJ. & ORS.

***