Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Manoj Kumar Saini vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:21109) on 2 May, 2025

Author: Rekha Borana

Bench: Rekha Borana

[2025:RJ-JD:21109]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                   S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9086/2025

1.       Manoj Kumar Saini S/o Keshar Deo, Aged About 43 Years,
         R/o Dhawada Ki Dhani, Vpo Nawalri, Tehsil Nawalgarh,
         District Jhunjhunu.
2.       Chetan Sharma S/o Harsahay Sharma, Aged About 42
         Years, R/o Village Anoppura, Post Rampura Unti, Waya
         Bagrli, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
3.       Sitaram Dautania S/o Late Kushala Ram Dautania, Aged
         About 43 Years, R/o Vpo Chawandia, Via Bass, Tehsil
         Andhi, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
4.       Bhanwar Singh S/o Bhom Singh, Aged About 59 Years, R/
         o Village Kailash, Post Nethwa, Tehsil Tara Nagar, District
         Churu, Rajasthan.
5.       Pushpa W/o Narendra Kumar, Aged About 43 Years, R/o
         Purohit Colony, Subhash Petrol Pump Ke Piche, Tilak
         Nagar, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
                                                                       ----Petitioners
                                         Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, School
         Education Department, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
         Jaipur.
2.       The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
                                                                     ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)              :     Mr. Kapil Kumar Khandelwal through
                                     VC.
For Respondent(s)              :     Mr. N.K. Mehta, Dy. G.C. with
                                     Mr. Vaibhav Bang.



              HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

02/05/2025

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

controversy rests covered by the judgment passed by a Co-

ordinate Bench of this Court in Poonma Ram vs. The State of

[2025:RJ-JD:21109] (2 of 5) [CW-9086/2025]

Rajasthan & Ors.; S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8749/2025

(decided on 28.04.2025).

2. In Poonma Ram's case (supra), the Co-ordinate Bench

observed and directed as under:

"Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 12.04.2025 (Annex.7) passed by the Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner, whereby the petitioner after being promoted as Principal/Equivalent Post has been transferred from Government Senior Secondary School, Hema Guda, District Jalore to Government Senior Secondary School, Khirodi, District Jalore. Further, it has been prayed that the petitioner may not be disturbed from his present place of posting as the present place is also lying vacant.

Briefly noted facts in the present writ petition are that in pursuance of the DPC convened on 17.01.2025, the petitioner while working as Vice Principal was promoted to the post of Principal. In pursuance of the promotion order dated 24.01.2025,the petitioner joined his duties at Government Senior Secondary School, Hema Guda, District Jalore. After joining of the petitioner, the respondents have issued an order/communication dated 27.01.2025 and amended Circular dated 10.03.2025 for holding the counseling for postings after promotion on the post of Principal and other posts. In pursuance of the order/communication dated 27.01.2025 and amended Circular dated 10.03.2025, the process for counseling was initiated by reflecting the vacant positions on different posts in the State of Rajasthan and the petitioner has participated in the counseling process. After counseling, the petitioner has been given posting at Government Senior Secondary School, Khirodi, District Jalore. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the promotion orders were issued, the respondents have undertaken the exercise of counseling for the purpose of posting to the persons on the promoted post. He further submits that the purpose of holding the counseling is to adjust the candidates on the nearby areas to mitigate their hardships and reduce disturbance of the family. He

[2025:RJ-JD:21109] (3 of 5) [CW-9086/2025]

further submits that the counseling process undertaken was required to be undertaken on the principles enunciated by the respondents in their order/communication dated 27.01.2025 and amended Circular dated 10.03.2025. He further submits that all the vacancies available in the rural as well as urban areas were required to betaken into consideration for posting after the counseling process. Learned counsel further submits that during the counseling process, the entire vacant positions have not been taken into consideration for giving posting and the persons like petitioner have suffered on account of being given posting at far off and distant places. He further submits that the petitioner can be adjusted in the nearby area on the vacant post available as per the order/communication dated 27.01.2025 and amended Circular dated 10.03.2025. He, therefore, prays that the petitioner may be given liberty to approach the respondents by way of filing an appropriate representation and the respondents may be directed to decide the same at the earliest by keeping in mind the vacancies available on the place of posting where the petitioner is already serving or in the nearby areas where the vacancies still exist.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the detailed guidelines have been formulated by the State Government for giving posting to the petitioner. He further submits that the order/communication dated 27.01.2025 and amended Circular dated 10.03.2025 have been framed by keeping in mind the fact that there has to be a balance of posting of the persons on the promoted post in the rural and urban areas. He further submits that the posting orders are being issued keeping in mind the strength of the students in the particular schools also. He further submits that in case, such representation is filed by the petitioner, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously keeping in mind the observations made by this Court in accordance with law.

I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and have gone through the relevant record of the case.

In pursuance of the order dated 24.01.2025, the petitioner was promoted from the post of Vice Principal to Principal/Senior Teacher to Lecturer and since it was mandated in the promotion order that the petitioner is required to join within a period of 15 days, therefore, he has joined the duties within the stipulated period of time.

[2025:RJ-JD:21109] (4 of 5) [CW-9086/2025]

After joining of the petitioner, the respondents have issued the order/communication dated 27.01.2025 and amended Circular dated 10.03.2025 for holding the counseling process for giving posting to the petitioner. The purpose of passing such order is mentioned in detail in these two orders.

Primarily, this Court is of the view that such process of counseling has been undertaken to ensure the grievances of the persons promoted on the post for giving them posting at the nearby places keeping in mind their difficulties/problems.

It is true that the respondents have laid down certain guidelines and parameters for undertaking the counseling process and therefore, the same are required to be adhered to. The grievance of the petitioner is that certain posts which are though lying vacant in the near vicinity of the area where the petitioner is serving, have not been reflected in the vacant posts available for counseling. Not only this, the place where the petitioner is serving is lying vacant has also not been reflected as vacant position during the counseling process.

This Court is of the considered opinion that if the counseling process is devised for the purpose of giving benefit to those persons then it should be implemented in its true spirit by filling up the vacant post as per the preference given by the candidate while giving postings.

In view of the discussion made above, the present writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate representation within a period of two weeks from today and in case such representation is filed, the respondents are directed to consider and decide the same expeditiously preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of such representation by keeping in mind the observations made hereinabove and after taking into consideration the order/communication dated 27.01.2025 and amended Circular dated 10.03.2025.

Needless to say that the respondents shall try and accommodate the petitioner on the vacant post available as perhis preference.

It is also ordered that other parameters like date of superannuation, illness suffered by any candidate or his close family members or any other contingencies warranting the discretion of the respondents shall also be taken into consideration while considering the representation for postings.

[2025:RJ-JD:21109] (5 of 5) [CW-9086/2025]

It is further ordered that till the representation is decided by the respondents, the transfer order issued in case of the petitioner shall remain stayed.

It is also made clear that if the petitioner fails to file such representation within a period of two weeks, the interim order granted by this Court shall not be continued."

3. In view of the submission made and in view of the judgment

passed in the case of Poonma Ram (supra), the present writ

petition is disposed of in the same terms and directions as

passed in the case of Poonma Ram (supra).

4. In terms of the directions issued in the case of Poonma

Ram (supra), the order impugned dated 12.04.2025 (Annexure-2)

shall remain stayed qua the present petitioner(s) till the

representation is decided by the respondent-Department. It is

further reiterated that if the representation is not filed by the

petitioner(s) within the stipulated period, the present interim

order shall cease to operate and the respondents shall be at

liberty to relieve the petitioner(s) from his/her present place of