Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Devendra Singh vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 7 February, 2025
Author: Dinesh Mehta
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
[2025:RJ-JD:7751]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3429/2025
1. Devendra Singh S/o Ghanshyam Singh, Aged About 34
Years, R/o Village Magra Ka Talab, Bheem, District
Rajsamand.
2. Yunus Mohammad S/o Yakub Ali, Aged About 35 Years, R/
o Village Aamner, District Rajsamand.
3. Vadami Kumari D/o Laxman Lal, Aged About 39 Years, R/
o Village Baghana, District Rajsamand.
4. Dheeraj Singh S/o Prathvi Singh, Aged About 29 Years, R/
o Village Kuwariya, Kalesariya, District Rajsamand.
5. Naveen Kumar S/o Nand Lal, Aged About 33 Years, R/o
Village Sangawas, Deogarh District Rajsamand.
6. Nirmla D/o Gopi Lal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Vijay
Colony, Bheem, District Rajsamand.
7. Nain Singh S/o Narayan Singh, Aged About 27 Years, R/o
Kukada, Bheem, District Rajsamand.
8. Mukesh Prajapati S/o Chhagan Lal, Aged About 29 Years,
R/o Kumar Mohalla, Bheem, District Rajsamand.
9. Kanchan Kumari W/o Bhagwan Singh, Aged About 31
Years, R/o Village Badagoan, Dasariya, Bheem, District
Rajsamand.
10. Rajendra Kumar S/o Gopi Lal, Aged About 37 Years, R/o
Village Bagad, Bheem, District Rajsamand.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department
Of Medical And Health, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Director (Non Gazette), Medical And Health Services,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Rajsamand.
4. The Principal Medical Officer, Government Sub- District
Hospital, Bheem, District Rajsamand.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Awar Dan Ujjwal
[2025:RJ-JD:7751] (2 of 5) [CW-3429/2025]
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
07/02/2025
1. While informing that petitioners are working as Urgent
Temporary Basis on the post of Nursing Officer, learned counsel for
the petitioners submitted that the controversy involved in the
present case is squarely covered by a judgment rendered by this
Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12243/2024 (Shruti
Moyal & Ors. V/s State of Rajasthan & Ors.), decided on
30.07.2024.
2. In the case of Shruti Moyal, the following order was passed:-
"1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
2. The present writ petition has been filed
with the following prayers:-
"A. the action of the respondents while
terminating the services of the petitioners
from the post of Assistant Radiographer, Lab
Technician and Assistant lab Technician on
the ground of availability of regularly
selected Lab Technicians despite the fact
that posts are still lying vacant, may kindly
be declared per se illegal, arbitrary and
contrary to the provisions of Constitution of
India.
B. The impugned orders dated 12.07.2014
(Annexure-7) may kindly be quashed and set
aside.
C. The impugned termination order of
petitioner No.1 dated 10.07.2024 (Annexure-
8) and order dated 10.07.2024 (Annexure-9)
by which services of petitioners No.1 have
been terminated and all orders issued by the
[2025:RJ-JD:7751] (3 of 5) [CW-3429/2025]
respondents in the intervening period,
terminating the services of the petitioners,
may kindly be ordered to be quashed and set
aside.
D. The respondents may kindly be directed
to reinstate the services of the petitioners
and they be permitted to continue their
services on their respective post.
E. The respondents may kindly be directed
not to replace the petitioners till the
agreement of the petitioners come to an
end.
F. That the respondents may be restrained
from dis-continuing services of the
petitioners and/or the present place of
posting of the petitioners may not changed."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners
submits that the petitioners were appointed on
the urgent temporary basis for a period of 3
months or till the regularly selected employees
are available with the respondent-Department,
whichever is earlier. Learned counsel submits
that the regularly selected employees are
available with the respondent-Department,
thus, the services of the petitioners have been
dispensed with vide order dated 10.07.2024.
4. Learned counsel further submits that after
the regularly selected persons having joined in
the respondent-Department, still there are
number of vacancies available with the
respondent-Department for the post of Lab
Technician and Assistant Radiographers. He,
therefore, prays that the respondents may be
directed that in case, there are vacancies
available in the Department and they are in
need of services of the petitioners, the
[2025:RJ-JD:7751] (4 of 5) [CW-3429/2025]
petitioners' services can be adjusted in the
nearby areas of District Pali/Beawar.
5. Considering the limited prayer of the
petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of with a
direction to the respondent No.7- Chief Medical
and Health Officer, Beawar & respondent No.8-
Chief Medical and Health Officer, Pali to
ascertain the number of vacancies available
with them in their jurisdiction and if they desire
to take the services of the petitioners on the
post available, the petitioners may be adjusted
or accommodated to serve on those posts till
the regularly selected candidates are available
with the respondent-Department.
6. It is made clear that if any of the
petitioner is not discharging his duties
satisfactorily, the respondents will be free to
discharge him from the employment.
7. Stay petition as well as other pending
applications, if any, shall also stand disposed
of".
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners may be permitted to file an appropriate representation
before the respondents in the light of judgment rendered by this
Court in the case of Shruti Moyal (supra) for redressal of their
grievance.
4. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of
in terms that in the event of filing a representation by the
petitioners, the same shall be considered and decided by the
respondents at the earliest preferably within a period of four
weeks from the date of receipt of such representation, keeping in
[2025:RJ-JD:7751] (5 of 5) [CW-3429/2025]
mind the law laid down by this Court in the case of Shruti Moyal
(supra).
5. Since, the essence of the direction in the case of Shruti
Moyal (supra) was to accommodate the persons who have
discharged their services on Urgent Temporary Basis on the vacant
seats with the State Government, the respondents shall not reject
the petitioners' request simply because the petitioners in the case
of Shruti Moyal (supra) were radiologist and lab technician
whereas the petitioners are working on other post(s).
6. The order has been passed based on the submissions made
in the petition, 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, the
petitioners would be entitled to the relief.
7. Stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
15-Mak/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
