Monday, 18, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Rajendra Singh vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors. ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 12657 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 12657 Raj
Judgement Date : 4 September, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Rajendra Singh vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors. ... on 4 September, 2025

Author: Rekha Borana
Bench: Rekha Borana
[2025:RJ-JD:39550]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12181/2017

Rajendra Singh S/o Shri Jagdish Singh, By Caste Rajput,
Resident Of Plot No. 157, Zsa, Bjs Colony, Jodhpur.
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1.       The State Of Rajasthan Through The Secretary To The
         Medical And Health Department, Secretariat, Jaipur
         Rajasthan.
2.       The Director, Medical And Health Department, Jaipur
         Rajasthan.
3.       The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Jodhpur Rajasthan.
4.       The Superintendent, Mathura Das Mathur                         Hospital,
         Department Of Medical And Health, Jodhpur.
                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Manoj Bhandari Sr. Adv. Asst by
                                Mr. Ojas Gupta
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Mukesh Dave, AGC with
                                Mr. Tanuj Jain



              HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

04/09/2025

1. The present petition has been filed with a prayer for grant of

service benefits keeping into account the entire period of service

of the petitioner that is, with effect from the date of his initial

appointment on temporary basis.

2. The petitioner is the 'Medical Officer' who was initially

appointed on temporary basis in the year 1999 after a regular

process of selection.

3. The services of the petitioner stood extended from time to

time by various orders to the said effect. The petitioner was even

granted the regular increments, the revised pay scales and even

the pay fixation.

[2025:RJ-JD:39550] (2 of 4) [CW-12181/2017]

4. Vide order dated 24.02.2015, the petitioner was given a

regular posting as 'Medical Officer' and his services were even

regularized vide order dated 09.03.2016. The petitioner was

granted all the service benefits from 24.02.2015 that is, with

effect from the date of his regular appointment.

5. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner having been

initially appointed vide a regular recruitment process, may be on

temporary basis, the period of his service deserves to be

computed from his initial date of appointment.

6. It has been submitted that the petitioner being governed by

the Rajasthan Medical and Health Services Rules 1963, is entitled

for the protection of pay and for the benefit of continuity of

service from his initial date of appointment.

7. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue rests

covered by the Division Bench judgment of this Court in State of

Rajasthan vs. Dr. Paritosh Ujjwal; D. B. Spl. Appl. Writ

No.532/2016 and other connected special appeals (decided on

09.07.2025).

8. In Dr. Paritosh Ujjwal (supra), the Division Bench while

dealing with akin facts, while relying upon the Apex Court

judgment in the case of Jaggo v. Union of India & Ors.;

(2024) SCC ONLINE SC 3836, observed as under:-

"25. Though appellants have taken conflicting stands as to the writ petitioners being engaged on contractual or urgent temporary engagement or ad-hoc basis, the fact is that the writ petitioners performed the duties which were integral to the post of medical officer and their long standing services were under the direct supervision of the Government Department. Not only this, the grant of pay-scales and other allowances

[2025:RJ-JD:39550] (3 of 4) [CW-12181/2017]

which are payable to the post in hand further fortify the stand that the writ petitioners were simply labeled as temporary but they were discharging the regular duties and were working against the sanctioned posts."

9. Therein, the Division Bench concluded as under:-

"28. Another consideration which is weighing in our mind is that against the same impugned order an appeal filed by the State Government being D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.380 of 2016 titled "State of Rajasthan & Ors. v. Dr. Dinesh Kumar Soni" has already been dismissed, though on the ground of limitation and SLP as well as review in the SLP have been dismissed. We are not inclined to take a different view in the present case. In the present cases, the appointments were against the vacant posts and after undertaking the selection process, though not by the Commission but by a Screening Committee, the same was having all the trappings of regular recruitment, inasmuch as, the writ petitioners were held entitled for regular pay- scales, increments and all other allowances which is clear from the appointment order itself. Thus, the denial of the tenure of service undertaken by the petitioners pursuant to the appointment order dated 28th November 1996 is not all justified and the learned Single Judge has rightly considered all the aspects of the matter while allowing the writ petitions filed by the petitioners."

10. The Division Bench vide the above order, affirmed the

following order of the learned Single Judge passed in S.B. Civil

[2025:RJ-JD:39550] (4 of 4) [CW-12181/2017]

Writ Petition No.9582/2008; Dr. Paritosh Ujjwal Vs. State

of Rajasthan & Ors. (decided on 12.02.2014):

"7. Consequently, these writ petitions are allowed with a direction to the State Government to grant the benefit of continuity of service to the petitioners and the period of service rendered earlier, may be reckoned from the initial date of appointment for all purposes since the new 2008 Rules now stand repealed w.e.f. 03.01.2012 and in the saving clause of the said Notification, it is clearly provided that the appointments, orders and anything done under the said Rules of 2008 shall be deemed to have been made in the provisions of Rajasthan Medical & Health Service Rules, 1963.

8. The writ petitions are, accordingly, allowed with aforesaid observations and directions. No costs. A copy of the order be sent to the concerned parties forthwith."

11. Counsel for the respondents is not in a position to refute the

position of law as laid down in Dr. Paritosh Ujjwal (supra).

12. In view of the ratio laid down in Dr. Paritosh Ujjwal (supra),

the present writ petition is allowed.

13. The respondents are directed to compute the services of the

petitioner from the date of his initial appointment on temporary

basis and after the said computation, grant him the benefit of

continuity of service for all purposes. Appropriate orders be

passed within a period of eight weeks from now.

14. Stay petition and all pending applications, if any, stand

disposed of.

(REKHA BORANA),J 60-Ajay Singh-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter