Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Rakesh Meena vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:47994) on 7 November, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:47994]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21843/2025
1. Rakesh Meena S/o Ram Khiladi Meena, Aged About 31
Years, Constable Belt No. - 353, Address - Vpo Jorli, Dist.
Karauli (Raj.)
2. Nemichand Meena S/o Indraj Meena, Aged About 28
Years, Constable Belt No. - 118, Address - Vpo Khanpur,
Dist. Karauli (Raj.)
3. Abhishek Meena S/o Tulsi Ram Meena, Aged About 25
Years, Constable Belt No. - 485, Address - Vpo Sundri,
Dist - Sawai Madhopur (Raj.)
4. Dharmendra Singh Gurjar S/o Gulab Singh Gurjar, Aged
About 27 Years, Belt No. - 179, Address - Vpo - Dulapura,
Abhanari, Dist. Dausa (Raj.)
5. Raju Gurjar S/o Nand Ram Gurjar, Aged About 30 Years,
Belt No. - 137, Address - Vpo Chand Pahari, Po, Akbarpur,
Dist. Alwar (Raj.)
6. Pankaj Kumar Dholi S/o Surendra Kumar Dholi, Aged
About 30 Years, Belt No. - 200, Address - Vpo Nahar
Khora, Dist. Dausa (Raj.)
7. Pooja Meena D/o Babu Lal Meena, Aged About 26 Years,
Belt No. - 672, Address - Vpo Sed Mata Ka Mamdir,
Roopawas, Dist. Alwar (Raj.)
8. Sapna Sharma D/o Sudama Sharma, Aged About 25
Years, Belt No. - 582, Address - Vpo Paladwas, Dist.
Bharatpur (Raj.)
9. Pawan Kumar Dhanka S/o Sheesh Ram Dhanka, Aged
About 31 Years, Belt No. - 533, Address - Vpo Kherki
Mukkar, Dist - Jaipur (Raj.)
10. Omveer S/o Darshan Singh, Aged About 25 Years, Belt
No. - 460, Address - Vpo Khedla, Tesgaon, Dist. Karauli
(Raj.)
11. Bablesh Kumar Meena S/o Prabhati Lal Meena, Aged
About 26 Years, Belt No. - 482, Address - Vpo Rani Ka
Bass, Peechupara Kalan, Dist. Dausa (Raj.)
12. Shimla Gurjar W/o Mukesh Singh Gurjar, Aged About 23
Years, Belt No. - 707, Address - Vpo Gurjar Mohalla,
Peepalki Dist. Dausa (Raj.)
(Uploaded on 10/11/2025 at 12:53:34 PM)
(Downloaded on 10/11/2025 at 08:53:11 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:47994] (2 of 4) [CW-21843/2025]
13. Shriram Meena S/o Ramji Lal Meena, Aged About 21
Years, Belt No. - 134, Address - Vpo Aasan Ki Dungri,
Sakat, Dist. Alwar (Raj.)
14. Mahesh Kumar Meena S/o Gangabisan Meena, Aged
About 27 Years, Belt No. - 139, Address - Vpo Nakwal Ki
Dhani, Gangawari, Dist. Dausa (Raj.)
15. Sandeep Kumar Meena S/o Balveer Singh, Aged About 25
Years, Belt No.- 550, Address - Vpo Hanuman Colony,
Ramgarh, Dist. Dausa (Raj.)
16. Ravi Prakash Meena S/o Man Phool Meena, Aged About
26 Years, Belt No. - 204, Address - Vpo Dhani Pemlya
Wali, Raniwas, Ladi Ka Bas, Dist. Dausa (Raj.)
17. Puneet Sharma S/o Dhanshi Sharma, Aged About 23
Years, Belt No. - 705, Address - Vpo Nareda, Dist. Jaipur
(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, Jalore, District Jalore (Raj.)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. OP Sangwa
For Respondent(s) : --
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
07/11/2025
1. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that the
issue raised in the present writ petition is covered by the
(Uploaded on 10/11/2025 at 12:53:34 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:47994] (3 of 4) [CW-21843/2025]
judgment in Dara Singh vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B.
Civil Writ Petition No.11973/2012, decided on 17.12.2012.
2. In the case of Dara Singh(supra), a coordinate Bench of this
Court, inter alia, directed as under:
"Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
realizing the mistake, appointment has been given,
thus, grievance of petitioner to the extent is
redressed, but appointment should have been made
effective from the date candidates lesser in merit
were given appointment with notional benefits.
In view of the prayer made and taking note of
the order dated 13.12.2012 whereby petitioner is
given appointment realizing mistake by the
respondents, I consider it proper to direct that
aforesaid appointment should be treated from the
date when lesser meritorious candidates were given.
The petitioner would, accordingly, be entitled to the
notional benefits and seniority from the date persons
with less merit were given appointment. The actual
benefits would be allowed from the date of joining
pursuant to the order dated 13.12.2012. With the
aforesaid, writ petition stands disposed of."
3. Learned counsel, therefore, prays that the petitioners may
be permitted to file a detailed representation before the
competent authorities for redressal of his grievances.
4. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed
of with liberty to the petitioners to file a representation to the
competent authorities of the department and the competent
authorities of the department are directed to decide the same
within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of such
representation, keeping in mind the law laid down by this Court
in the case of Dara Singh(supra).
(Uploaded on 10/11/2025 at 12:53:34 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:47994] (4 of 4) [CW-21843/2025]
5. 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.
6. Stay petition also stands disposed of.
(FARJAND ALI),J
272-Samvedana/-
(Uploaded on 10/11/2025 at 12:53:34 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
