Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 5090 Raj
Judgement Date : 22 January, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:4006]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1171/2025
Parmanand S/o Shri Om Prakash, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Ship
House, Gali No. 2, Sargara Colony, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
Local Self Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. Director, Local Self Department, Government Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. Deputy Director, Local Self Government, Jodhpur.
4. Commissioner, Municipal Council, Jaisalmer.
----Respondents
Connected with
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1523/2025
1. Ashok Kachhwaha S/o Shri Om Prakash, Aged About 36
Years, R/o Ship House, Gali No. 2, Sargara Colony,
Jodhpur.
2. Rakash Panwar S/o Shri Om Prakash, Aged About 35
Years, R/o Ship House, Gali No. 2, Sargara Colony,
Jodhpur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
Local Self Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. Director, Local Self Department, Government Of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. Deputy Director, Local Self Government, Jodhpur.
4. Executive Officer, Municipal Board, Sumerpur, Pali.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Saransh Vij.
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
Order(Oral)
22/01/2025
1. Petitioners herein are before this Court seeking directions to
the respondents for regularizing their services against the
[2025:RJ-JD:4006] (2 of 2) [CW-1171/2025]
sanctioned post of Computer Operator/Peon, along with all
consequential benefits.
2. At the outset, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioners that the issue raised in the present writ petitions is
covered by a judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in
State of Karnataka Vs. Uma Devi [(2006) 4 SCC 1] read with
order/judgment passed in Roshan Lal Saini Vs. State & Ors.:
18056/2015, decided on 09.03.2017. 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 Uma Devi & Roshan Lal Saini
(supra), as expeditiously as possible.
4. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
(ARUN MONGA),J 34 & 75 DhananjayS/jitender
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!