Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sajjan Lal Meena vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:2548) on 15 January, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:2548]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 688/2025
1. Sajjan Lal Meena S/o Babru Lal Meena, Aged About 31
Years, Constable Belt No. 433, R/o (Baba Talai)
Kachumara, Dhikiya, Kaanor, District Udaipur (Raj.).
2. Urmila Meena D/o Banshi Lal Meena, Aged About 25
Years, Constable Driver Belt No. 628, R/o Khandiovri,
Nichla Phala, District Udaipur (Raj.).
3. Karan Ameta S/o Shyam Lal Ameta, Aged About 26 Years,
Constable Bent No. 172, R/o 274, Brahmpuri, Teetardi,
District Ajmer (Raj.).
4. Rohit Kumar Jain S/o Pawan Kumar Jain, Aged About 26
Years, Constable Belt No.756, R/osinroj, Arain, District
Ajmer (Raj.).
5. Suhavat Ganpat Jawangsing S/o Jawansingh Suhawat,
Aged About 26 Years, Constable Belt No. 265, R/o
Suaawaton Ka Gurha, Suavaton Ka Guda, Tehsil Gogunda,
District Udaipur.
6. Narpat Singh Cauhan S/o Ishwar Singh Cauhan, Aged
About 26 Years, Constable Belt No. 109, R/o Vara Kundli,
Post Sakani, District Dungarpur (Raj.).
7. Dungar Singh S/o Lal Singh, Aged About 24 Years,
Constable Belt No. 190, R/o Adwas, Sarada, District
Udaipur (Raj.).
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department Of
Home, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.).
2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Finance (Rules),
Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat,
Jaipur (Raj.).
3. Director General Of Police, Police Head Quarter, Lal Kothi,
Jaipur (Raj.).
4. Superintendent Of Police, Udaipur, District Udaipur (Raj.).
----Respondents
Connected with
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 701/2025
1. Sher Singh S/o Sugan Singh, Aged About 27 Years,
Constable Belt No 172, R/o Jandesar, District Jodhpur.
(Raj.).
2. Vijay Kumar Pingoliya S/o Prabhu Lal Pingoliya, Aged
About 27 Years, Constable Belt No 249, R/o 10, Bajrang
Nagar, Kartarpura, District Jaipur. (Raj.).
3. Kishan Kumar Nawariya S/o Hariya Lal Nawariya, Aged
About 28 Years, Constable Driver Belt No 252, R/o Ward
No.08, Barnala, District Sawai Madhopur. (Raj.).
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department
Of Home, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Finance (Rules),
(Downloaded on 16/01/2025 at 09:41:17 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:2548] (2 of 3) [CW-688/2025]
Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat,
Jaipur (Raj.).
3. Director General Of Police, Police Head Quarter, Lal
Kothi, Jaipur (Raj.)
4. Superintendent Of Police, Pali, District Pali (Raj.)
----Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 705/2025
Jagdish Prasad Meena S/o Arjun Lal Meena, Aged About 40
Years, Constable Belt No 647, Dhani Choukidaran Tan
Chawndeda, Tehsil And District Dausa. (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department
Of Home, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Finance (Rules),
Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat,
Jaipur (Raj.).
3. Director General Of Police, Police Head Quarter, Lal
Kothi, Jaipur (Raj.)
4. Superintendent Of Police, Kota City, District Kota. (Raj.)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bherulal Jat.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
Order
15/01/2025
1. Petitioners herein seek a direction to the respondents to give
notional benefits, pay-fixation, seniority to them from the date of
appointment as has been given to their counter-parts.
2. At the outset, it is submitted by learned counsel for the
petitioners that the issue raised in the present writ petitions is
covered by an order dated 17.12.2012 passed by a Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.11973/2012 : Dara Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
[2025:RJ-JD:2548] (3 of 3) [CW-688/2025]
He submits that the petitioners are sanguine that, in case they are
allowed to file a representation qua the grievance raised in the
present writ petitions and the same is considered in light of the
aforesaid judgment, they will be meted out with favorable
treatment.
3. In view of the aforesaid, without commenting on the merits
of the case, the petitions filed by the petitioners are disposed of
with a direction to the competent authority to decide the
representation (may file fresh, if not already filed) of the
petitioners, in accordance with law, keeping in view the
observations made in the case of Dara Singh (supra), as
expeditiously as possible.
4. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
(ARUN MONGA),J
45, 47 & 48 -Jitender
Whether fit for reporting : Yes / No.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
