Udai Lal Dhobi vs The State Of Rajasthan ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 15063 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 15063 Raj
Judgement Date : 7 November, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Udai Lal Dhobi vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 7 November, 2025

Author: Farjand Ali

Bench: Farjand Ali

[2025:RJ-JD:47825]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16901/2025

Udai Lal Dhobi S/o Shri Bheru Lal, Aged About 39 Years, R/o
House      No.160,    Kumar          Mohalla,      Village        Piipalwas,   Tehsil
Bhadesar, District Chittorgarh (Raj.).
                                                                      ----Petitioner
                                      Versus
1.       The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary,
         Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department,
         Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2.       The    Commissioner          (Egs),       Rural      Development       And
         Panchayati Raj Department, Government Secretariat,
         Jaipur, Rajasthan.
3.       The District Collector, Chittorgarh.
4.       The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Chittorgarh,
         Rajasthan.
5.       The Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Bhadesar,
         District Chittorgarh.
                                                                   ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr. Vikram Singh Bhawla
For Respondent(s)          :     -



                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

07/11/2025

1. The petition was filed with the grievance that his candidature

for contractual appointment on the post of Gram Panchayat

Sahayak was wrongly rejected by respondents despite the fact

that he was more meritorious than the other candidates.

2. It is not disputed that the post in question was only on

contract basis and was only for one year. To that extent, the relief

(Uploaded on 10/11/2025 at 12:38:51 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:47825] (2 of 3) [CW-16901/2025]

sought by the petitioner is though rendered infructuous for the

year when the petitioner wanted to be appointed.

3. On the query being posed by this Court, the learned counsel

for the petitioner states that though the appointment was

contractual, at that time, but was contemplated for one year.

However, it is borne out that for subsequent years all those

candidates, who were appointed, have also been allowed to

continue on year to year basis. He also places reliance upon the

order passed in the case of Pawan Kumar Vs. State & Ors.:

SBCWP No.1704/2018, decided on 12.03.2018 and prays

that the respondents may kindly be directed to consider the case

of the petitioner in light of the order passed in Pawan Kumar

(supra).

4. Being so, the writ petition is disposed of with the expectation

from the respondents that in case the petitioner are eligible to be

appointed as Gram Panchayat Sahayak/Panchayat Shikshak

subject to determination of their eligibility as well as the

requirement of job on any vacant post in question, on an

application being submitted by the petitioner, the same shall be

entertained in accordance with law. It shall also be considered as

to why the petitioner's candidature cannot be considered for

contractual appointment under the provisions of Rajasthan

Contractual Hiring to Civil Posts Rules, 2022.

5. It is made clear that in case such an application is filed by

the petitioner, the competent authority shall go through the same