Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ashok Kumar vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 8 January, 2025
Author: Dinesh Mehta
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
[2025:RJ-JD:1020]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 78/2025
1. Ashok Kumar S/o Sharoopa Ram Godara, Aged About 50
Years, R/o Vpo Beri Walo Talla, Tehsil Barmer Rural,
District Barmer, Rajasthan (Clis)
2. Ugam Raj S/o Chena Ram, Aged About 39 Years, R/o
1608, Bhakhar Wali Gali New Vas Samdarri, Vpo Samdari,
Tehsil Samdari, District Balotra, Rajasthan (Clis)
3. Rewant Dan S/o Shri Mohan Singh, Aged About 38 Years,
R/o Vpo Samdari Block Samdari, District Balotra,
Rajasthan (Pgdca)
4. Lakh Singh S/o Kishan Singh, Aged About 39 Years, R/o
Vpo Mandli, Tehsil Kalyanpur, District Balotra, Rajasthan
(Clis)
5. Khojoo Ram S/o Nathoo Ram, Aged About 43 Years, R/o
Vpo Ratry Bhinyad, Tehsil Shiv, District Barmer, Rajasthan
(Clis)
6. Bagata Ram S/o Hukama Ram, Aged About 37 Years, R/o
Vpo Rateu, Tehsil Gida, District Barmer, Rajasthan (Clis)
7. Daud Khan S/o Unas Khan, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Vpo
Gangala, Tehsil Ramsar, District Barmer, Rajasthan (Clis)
8. Rama Ram S/o Ravta Ram, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Vpo
Dudaberi, Andaniyan Ka Tala, District Barmer, Rajasthan
(Blis)
9. Roshan Din S/o Ali Sher, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Vpo
Junejo Ki Basti, Tehsil Sheo, District Barmer, Rajasthan
(Clis)
10. Prem Prakash S/o Jeeya Ram, Aged About 39 Years, R/o
Vpo Aaidan Ki Dhani Dharasar, District Barmer, Rajasthan
(Clis)
11. Gorkha Ram S/o Harji Ram, Aged About 45 Years, R/o
Village Kothe Ka Tala Ghoriya, Tehsil Chohtan, District
Barmer, Rajasthan (Clis)
12. Chandra Prakash Nagar S/o Chhitar Lal Nagar, Aged
About 46 Years, R/o Vpo Bhanwargarh, Tehsil Kishanganj,
District Baran, Rajasthan (Clis)
13. Keshari Lal Mehta, Aged About 53 Years, R/o Village
Khushiyara, Post Samraniya, Tehsil Shahabad, District
Baran, Rajasthan (Clis)
14. Naresh Kumar Nagar S/o Madan Lal Nagar, Aged About 45
Years, R/o Village Khejda, Post Nipania, Tehsil Chhabra,
District Baran, Rajasthan (Clis)
15. Surendra Kumar S/o Vishnu Prasad Sharma, Aged About
49 Years, R/o Post Buharu, Tehsil Roopangarh, District
Ajmer, Rajasthan (Clis)
16. Nathi Devi D/o Pusha Lal Jaat, Aged About 38 Years, R/o
Vpo Raghunathpura, Tehsil Roopangarh, District Ajmer,
[2025:RJ-JD:1020] (2 of 4) [CW-78/2025]
Rajasthan (Clis)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary,
School Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
Jaipur (Raj.).
2. The Deputy Secretary, Department Of Elementary
Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat , Jaipur
(Raj.).
3. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner
(Raj.).
4. The District Education Officer, Headquarters, Elementary
Education, Barmer (Raj.).
5. The District Education Officer, Headquarters, Elementary
Education, Balotra (Raj.).
6. The District Education Officer, Headquarters, Elementary
Education, Baran (Raj.).
7. The District Education Officer, Headquarters, Elementary
Education, Ajmer (Raj.).
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikram Singh Bhawla
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
08/01/2025
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that identical
writ petition being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1590/2024
(Praveen Kumar Paliwal Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) has
been disposed of by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order
dated 02.02.2024.
2. Learned counsel prayed that similar order be passed in
petitioners' case also.
3. In case of Praveen Kumar Paliwal (supra), a co-ordinate
Bench of this Court has observed as under:-
[2025:RJ-JD:1020] (3 of 4) [CW-78/2025]
1. Grievance of the petitioners herein, arises out of the
inaction/non-consideration on the part of the respondents
to consider their claim of re-fixation of their monthly pay
at the rate of Rs.16,900/- as against Rs.10,400/- which is
being currently paid, notwithstanding that the Director,
Elementary Education, Rajasthan vide a letter dated
24.04.2023 recommended their case favourably to Deputy
Secretary(Admn.), Department of Elementary Education,
Government of Rajasthan.
2. They also rely a judgment rendered by this Court in
case of Jassa Ram Choudhary and Ors. Vs. State of
Rajasthan and Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.
17901/2023) decided on 09.11.2023 pursuant whereto,
similarly situated counter parts have been accorded
benefit. They claim that despite their passing the requisite
qualification of B.L.I.S., D.L.I.S and C.L.I.S., they are not
being considered eligible for appointment as physical
education teachers in the Elementary Education
Department in the higher pay bracket as aforesaid.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners at the outset
submits that qua the aforesaid grievance, the petitioner
also submitted representation (Annexure-7) before the
competent authority for redressal thereof, which has
remained pending till date without being taken up for
passing any orders either way, therefore, the competent
authority be directed to decided the same by passing
appropriate administrative orders expeditiously.
4. Request seems to be fair.
5. Given the nature of order which is being passed, no
prejudice would be caused to the respondents and,
therefore, the requirement of issuance of notice is
dispensed with as no return is required to be filed by
them.
6. In the aforesaid premise, the writ petition is
disposed of. The respondent competent authority is
directed to decide the pending representations of the
petitioner (Annexure-7) by passing an appropriate
administrative order, in accordance with law.
[2025:RJ-JD:1020] (4 of 4) [CW-78/2025]
7. Needful be done as expeditiously as possible.
4. The present writ petition is disposed of in the same terms.
5. The competent authority is directed to deal with petitioners'
representation by passing appropriate order in accordance with
law.
6. Stay application also stand disposed of accordingly.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
58-akansha/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
