Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jagdish vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:29526) on 8 July, 2025
Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:29526]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9818/2025
1. Jagdish S/o Asharam, Aged About 25 Years, At Present
Working At C.h.c. Gundoj District Pali.
2. Rajesh S/o Arjun Singh, Aged About 40 Years, At Present
Working At C.h.c. Jawaja District Beawar.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Of Secretary,
Medical And Health Services, Govt. Of Rajasthan
Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Principal Secretary, Department Of Personnel,
Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. Prinicpal Secretary, Department Of Finance, Government
Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
4. Managing Director, N.h.m. Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur.
5. Mission Director, National Health Commission, Jaipur.
6. Director, Directorate Of Medical And Health Services,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
7. Director (Non- Gazetted), Medical And Health Services,
Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
8. Nodal Officer (Mndy), Medical And Health Services, Jaipur.
9. Nodal Officer (Mnjy), Medical And Health Services, Jaipur.
10. Rajasthan Medical Services Corporation Ltd. (Rmsc),
Through Its Managing Director, Department Of Medical
And Health, Swasthya Bhawan, Jaipur.
11. Chief Executive Officer, State Health Assurance Agency,
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
12. Project Director National Health Mission (Mtc), Swasthya
Bhawan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
13. Project Director National Health Mission (Fbnc), Swasthya
Bhawan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
14. Principal Medical Officer, Pali.
15. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Pali.
16. Rajasthan Medical Relief Society, Pali, Through Secretary,
District Pali.
(Downloaded on 09/07/2025 at 09:47:17 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:29526] (2 of 4) [CW-9818/2025]
17. Principal Medical Officer, District Beawar.
18. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Beawar.
19. Rajasthan Medical Relief Society, Beawar, Through
Secretary, District Beawar.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mrinal Khatri with
Mr. Shrikant Verma
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order
08/07/2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
2. The present writ petition has been filed with following
prayers:-
"I. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
respondents may kindly be directed to regularize the
services of the petitioners on their respective posts
after screening and consequently, give all the benefits
of the services from the date of their respective initial
date of appointment in view of the provisions of
Rajasthan Contractual Hiring to Civil Posts Rules, 2022.
II. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
respondents may kindly be directed to treat the
petitioners at par to the other employees who have
been extended the benefits under the Rules of 2022."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
controversy involved in the present writ petition is squarely
covered by a judgment of this Court rendered in S.B. Civil Writ
Petition No.483/2023 (Hitesh Kumar & Ors. Vs. State of
Rajasthan & Ors.) and other connected matters, decided on
19.07.2023 in the following terms:-
[2025:RJ-JD:29526] (3 of 4) [CW-9818/2025]
"8. Having regard to the rival stands, instead of
deciding petitioners' entitlement at this stage, as the same
would require factual determination of various aspects, all
these writ petitions are disposed of with the directions to each
of the petitioners to file his/her representation before the
CMHO of his/her District, where they are/were engaged.
9. It will be required of the petitioners to file a copy of
the advertisement, appointment letter by the CMHO or any
other competent Government official and/or a copy of the
contract.
10. The representation aforesaid be filed on or before
10.08.2023.
11. The concerned CMHO shall consider candidature of
each of the petitioners separately in terms of the Rules of
2022, particularly Rule 3 of the Rules of 2022. He shall clearly
indicate as to whether appointment of the petitioner was
under scheme or project of the State Government and he/she
was engaged through public advertisement. The CMHO shall
decide the representation of the petitioners on or before
15.09.2023.
12. The concerned CMHO shall forward the list of all the
candidates, who fulfill the conditions of the Rules of 2022, to
the Director Medical Health.
13. The Director Medical & Health shall consolidate list
so sent by all the CMHOs and recommend the names to the
Finance Department for doing the needful in accordance with
law.
14. Once, such list is received from the Director Medical
& Health, the needful in accordance with law will be done by
the Finance Department within a period of four weeks.
15. It is hereby made clear that this Court has not
pronounced upon the eligibility or entitlement of any of the
candidates under the Rules of 2022. In case any candidate
has been engaged through placement agency, the concerned
CMHO shall seek guidance from the State Government
(Finance Department) and decide his/her case individually.
16. If final decision of the CMHO concerned or State
Government is prejudicial to the rights of the petitioner(s),
he/she/they will be free to take legal remedies in accordance
with law.
[2025:RJ-JD:29526] (4 of 4) [CW-9818/2025]
17. Stay petitions also stand disposed of."
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners may be permitted to file a representation to the
respondents afresh for redressal of the grievances in light of the
judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Hitesh Kumar
(supra).
5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for
the petitioners, the present writ petition is disposed of with a
direction to the respondents to decide the representation of the
petitioners strictly in accordance with law, considering the
judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Hitesh Kumar
(supra), if the case of the petitioners stands on the same footing.
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.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
40-Nitin/c-11/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
