Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Hari Ram vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 7 November, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:48060]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21759/2025
1. Hari Ram S/o Praathvi Raj, Aged About 32 Years, R/o
Village Kethuda, Post Jakhmund, Tehsil Talera, District
Bundi, Rajasthan (Pgdca).
2. Shar Ram Meghwal S/o Dhanraj Meghwal, Aged About 31
Years, R/o Villae Bakshpura, Post Notara Bhopat, Tehsil
Talera, District Bundi, Rajasthan (Dlis).
3. Vinod Kumar Meghwal S/o Bheru Lal Meghwal, Aged
About 34 Years, R/o Village Badoonda, Post Bajar, Tehsil
Talera, District Bundi, Rajasthan (Clis).
4. Arjun Singh Rathod S/o Laxman Singh, Aged About 44
Years, R/o Village Chhapawda, Post Bajar, Tehsil Talera,
District Bundi, Rajasthan (Clis).
5. Anadi Lal Gurjar S/o Ram Lal Gurjar, Aged About 32
Years, R/o Vpo Khadipur, Tehsil Talera, District Bundi,
Rajasthan (Blis).
6. Ratti Ram Meena S/o Gopi Ram Meena, Aged About 46
Years, R/o Village Kheda, Post Tumadi, Tehsil Nangal
Rajawtan, District Dausa, Rajasthan (Clis).
7. Jai Ram Meena S/o Mishri Lal Meena, Aged About 48
Years, R/o Vpo Gumanpura, Tehsil Baharawnda, District
Dausa, Rajasthan (Clis).
8. Babu Lal Meena S/o Jagdish Prasad Meena, Aged About
47 Years, R/o Vpo Chhareda, Tehsil Nangal Rajawatan,
District Dausa, Rajasthan (Clis).
9. Ramavtar Meena S/o Bhoma Ram Meena, Aged About 44
Years, R/o Vpo Khanwas, Tehsil Lawan, District Dausa,
Rajasthan (Clis).
10. Anita Jain W/o Naresh Kumar Jain, Aged About 49 Years,
R/o Awa Road Bas Stand Ke Pas Rajputon Ka Mohalla,
District Bundi, Rajasthan (Blis).
11. Moti Lal Biloniya S/o Shri Gyarsi Lal Raigar, Aged About
54 Years, R/o Vpo Aluda, Tehsil Paparda, Block Nagal
Rajawtan, District Dausa, Rajasthan (Clis).
12. Rakesh Berwa S/o Babulal Bairwa, Aged About 41 Years,
R/o Mata Ji Ke Mandir Ke Pass Ward Number 9,
Bhanwargarh, Tehsil Kishanganj, District Baran, Rajasthan
(Clis).
13. Kanhaiya Lal Meghwal S/o Raghunath Maghwal, Aged
About 52 Years, R/o Hanuman Chouk, Ward No. 9,
Bagdari, District Pratapgarh, Rajasthan (Blis).
----Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary,
School Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,
Jaipur (Raj.).
(Uploaded on 10/11/2025 at 04:04:23 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/11/2025 at 07:11:49 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:48060] (2 of 3) [CW-21759/2025]
2. Director, Elementary Education, Bikaner.
3. District Education Officer Elementary Education, Bundi.
4. District Education Officer Elementary Education, Dausa.
5. District Education Officer Elementary Education, Baran.
6. District Education Officer Elementary Education,
Pratapgarh.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikram Singh Bhawla
For Respondent(s) : -
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
07/11/2025
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 counterparts
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.
(Uploaded on 10/11/2025 at 04:04:23 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:48060] (3 of 3) [CW-21759/2025]
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners at the outset submits
that qua the aforesaid grievance, the petitioners 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 petitioners would be at liberty to file a fresh representation
along with a copy of this order. Upon filing of the same, the
respondent competent authority is directed to decide the said
representations within a period of 20 days from the date of receipt
of the same by passing an appropriate administrative order, in
accordance with law as well as in the light of order dated
09.11.2023 passed by this Court in the case of Jassa Ram
Choudhary (spura).
7. Needful be done as expeditiously as possible.
(FARJAND ALI),J
223-chhavi/-
(Uploaded on 10/11/2025 at 04:04:23 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
