Pawan Kumar Arya vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:15153) on 2 April, 2026

Author: Nupur Bhati

Bench: Nupur Bhati

[2026:RJ-JD:15153]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7479/2026

1.       Pawan Kumar Arya S/o Ransingh, Aged About 48 Years,
         R/o     Ward         No.       9      Shyoratada,            Bhadra    District
         Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
2.       Ram Swaroop W/o Ramrakh, Aged About 42 Years, R/o
         Dhannasar, Rawatsar District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
3.       Barjinder Kaur D/o Baldev Singh, Aged About 44 Years,
         R/o    Ward         No.       13      Vpo      Talwara        Jheel,   District
         Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
4.       Jethi W/o Vijay Kumar Parihar, Aged About 51 Years, R/o
         Ward No 19 Karanpur, District Ganganagar, Rajasthan.
5.       Vikram Babu Sethi S/o Hansraj Sethi, Aged About 43
         Years, R/o Ward No 7 Karanpur, District Ganganagar,
         Rajasthan.
6.       Salochana W/o Chirangi Lal, Aged About 41 Years, R/o 2
         Fc Karanpur, District Ganganagar, Rajasthan.
7.       Anusuiya Devi W/o Ramesh Kumar, Aged About 43 Years,
         R/o    42    H     23-O       Sri    Karanpur,        District   Ganganagar,
         Rajasthan.
8.       Ramswaroop W/o Rati Ram, Aged About 45 Years, R/o
         Mllerkhera, Sangria District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
9.       Satya Narayan S/o Roopram Godara, Aged About 42
         Years, R/o Jakhdawali, Pilibangan District Hanumangarh,
         Rajasthan.
10.      Kanta, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Gandhi Bari 6 Sdr
         District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
11.      Champa Devi W/o Prabhu Ram, Aged About 43 Years, R/o
         Village Fatehgarh, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
12.      Lali W/o Bisna Ram, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Ward No
         11, Barwali, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
13.      Kavita Kumari W/o Rajmal Ghotia, Aged About 31 Years,
         R/o    Ward         No      9,      Bhadi,       Tehsil      Bhadra    District
         Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
14.      Suman W/o Kuldeep Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
         Ward        No      8,      Sahuwala,           Tehsil       Bhadra    District
         Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
15.      Tilok Chand Chhimpa S/o Khyaliram, Aged About 46

                           (Uploaded on 02/04/2026 at 04:10:47 PM)
                          (Downloaded on 02/04/2026 at 08:53:49 PM)
 [2026:RJ-JD:15153]                     (2 of 6)                           [CW-7479/2026]


         Years,      R/o    Knn,       Phephana         District    Hanumangarh,
         Rajasthan.
16.      Mukesh Kumari W/o Ajit Singh, Aged About 39 Years, R/o
         Palri, Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
17.      Kavita Devi W/o Mohan Lal, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
         Malkhera,         Tehsil      Bhadra,         District     Hanumangarh,
         Rajasthan.
18.      Suman Kumari W/o Pradeep Kumar, Aged About 32 Years,
         R/o Chubkiya Tal, District Churu, Rajasthan.
19.      Sharmila W/o Arvind Kumar, Aged About 32 Years, R/o
         Swai Chhani, 4 Chn Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh,
         Rajasthan.
20.      Meena W/o Vijendra Kumar, Aged About 39 Years, R/o
         Beenjawas, Churu, Rajasthan.
21.      Kumari Manju D/o Suresh Kumar, Aged About 33 Years,
         R/o Janau Khari, Churu ,rajasthan.
22.      Saroj Kumari W/o Jai Singh Thalor, Aged About 42 Years,
         R/o Bherusari 6 Spd- A, Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
23.      Brashaspati W/o Ashok Kumar, Aged About 42 Years, R/o
         Ward No 1, Dabri, Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh,
         Rajasthan.
24.      Manju       W/o    Lalchand,        Aged      About       40     Years,   R/o
         Bharwana,         Tehsil      Bhadra,         District     Hanumangarh,
         Rajasthan.
25.      Shushila Verma W/o Gajendra Verma, Aged About 52
         Years,       R/o        48,       Vikash          Nagar,         Block      A,
         Rangtalab(Kalatalab)           Arjunpura,          Kota,       District   Kota
         Rajasthan.
26.      Gurpreet Kaur W/o Sandeep Singh, Aged About 37 Years,
         R/o    Ward       No.   8,    Amargarh,          Sadulshahar,        4    Krw,
         Ganganagar, District Sri Ganganagar Rajasthan.
27.      Chhota Ram Dhaka S/o Bhanwar Lal, Aged About 45
         Years, R/o Dabariyani Khurd, Tehsil Merta City, District
         Nagaur Rajasthan,
28.      Umashankar Gochar S/o Moolchand Gochar, Aged About
         47 Years, R/o Gurjar Mohalla, Ward No.2, Chardana,
         Tehsil Atru, District Baran.
29.      Arpit Sharma S/o Devesh Sharma, Aged About 42 Years,


                        (Uploaded on 02/04/2026 at 04:10:47 PM)
                       (Downloaded on 02/04/2026 at 08:53:49 PM)
 [2026:RJ-JD:15153]                     (3 of 6)                         [CW-7479/2026]


         R/o 70, Shivam Vihar Colony, Kota Road, Baran.
30.      Murlidhar Nagar S/o Dhanna Lal, Aged About 46 Years, R/
         o 81, Nayapura Mohalla, Sukhneri, District Baran.
31.      Kailash Chnd Nagar S/o Ram Gopal Nagar, Aged About 44
         Years,      R/o   Village       Sukhneri,         Post    Bilendi,   Tehsil
         Chhipabarod, District Baran.
32.      Harimohan Shakywal S/o Chhaganlal Shakyawal, Aged
         About 45 Years, R/o Gayatri Nagar, Atru, District Baran.
33.      Rakesh Kumar Nagar S/o Meena Nagar, Aged About 44
         Years, R/o H.no.33, Vhl, Near Chauth Mata Mandir,
         Vivekanand Nagar, Engineering College, Kota.
34.      Sanjay Kumar Meghwal S/o Bajrang Lal Meghwal, Aged
         About 46 Years, R/o Gayatri Nagar, Khedaliganj, Atru,
         District Baran.
35.      Shama Be W/o Asgar Ali, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Ward
         No.5, Galwan Mandir Ke Pichhe, Mangrol, District Baran.
36.      Trilok Kumar Nagar S/o Shyamlal, Aged About 40 Years,
         R/o Dhakado Ka Mohalla, Ardand, District Baran.
37.      Bajrang Singh Tanwar S/o Karan Singh Tanwar, Aged
         About 47 Years, R/o Old Nakoda Colony, Tel Factory,
         Baran.
                                                                    ----Petitioners
                                      Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Medical
         And    Health     Department,            Government       Of    Rajasthan,
         Jaipur.
2.       Director      (Non-Gazzetted),               Medical       And       Health
         Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3.       Principal Medical Officer, Government District Hospital,
         Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.
4.       Principal Medical Officer, Government District Hospital, Sri
         Ganganagar, Rajasthan.
5.       Principal Medical Officer, Government District Hospital,
         Churu, Rajasthan.
6.       Principal Medical Officer, Government District Hospital,
         Nagaur, Rajasthan.
7.       Principal Medical Officer, Government District Hospital,


                        (Uploaded on 02/04/2026 at 04:10:47 PM)
                       (Downloaded on 02/04/2026 at 08:53:49 PM)
 [2026:RJ-JD:15153]                     (4 of 6)                        [CW-7479/2026]


         Baran, Rajasthan.
8.       Principal Medical Officer, Government District Hospital,
         Kota Rajasthan.
9.       The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Hanumangarh
         Rajasthan.
10.      The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Sri Ganganagar
         Rajasthan.
11.      The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Churu Rajasthan.
12.      The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Nagaur Rajasthan.
13.      The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Baran, Rajasthan.
14.      The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Kota Rajasthan.
                                                                   ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)           :     Mr. Vikram Singh Bhawla
For Respondent(s)           :     Mr. Tanuj Jain for
                                  Mr. Mukesh Dave.



               HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

Order

02/04/2026

1. The present writ petition has been filed with the following

prayers:-

"1. the action of the respondents while not extending the petitioners the benefits and grant of fixation of their salary of selection grades after completion of 9, 18 and 27 years of services in the upgraded pay scales while not counting their services from the date of their initial appointment, may kindly be declared per se illegal, arbitrary, unjust and in clear violation of the relevant provisions of law.

2. the respondents be directed to confer the benefits and grant fixation of their salary of Selection Grades after completion of 9, 18 and 27 years of service in the upgraded pay scales counting their services w.e.f. the date of their initial appointment with all consequential benefits including arrears of salary.

3. the respondents be directed to count the services of the petitioners rendered by them as Nurse Gr.II in the same department under the Rules of 1965 for all purposes including pension, seniority, gratuity,

(Uploaded on 02/04/2026 at 04:10:47 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:15153] (5 of 6) [CW-7479/2026]

commutation of leave etc. and to confer them all the benefits accruing from the past services rendered by them in the department of Medical and Health as Medical Officer under the Rules of 1965. xxxxxx"

2. Learned counsel for the parties jointly submit that the

controversy involved is squarely covered by the judgment passed

by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of State of

Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Dinesh Kumar Soni: SBSAW

No.380/2016 and it is apprised to this court that an SLP as well

as review in the SLP against the order above have been dismissed.

Observing all those things in a judgment rendered in a batch of

Special Appeal Writs led by D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No.532/2016

(The State of Rajasthan & Ors. vs. Dr. Paritosh Ujjwal &

Ors.), relying upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in

Jaggo v. Union of India & Ors.; (2024) SCC ONLINE SC

3836, directed the respondents to compute the services of the

petitioners from the date of their initial temporary/ad-hoc/urgent

appointment and grant continuity of service for all purposes.

3. The submission of the learned counsel for the State that in

the case of Dr. Paritosh Ujjwal (supra), a Selection Committee had

been constituted for the purpose of recruitment of the petitioners

therein, whereas in the present case, the aspirants were merely

allowed through the advertisement to drop the irrelevant papers in

the boxes installed, does not carry much substance. This Court is

of the view that in the case of petitioners also, the entire selection

process was followed up in accordance with the procedure

established by law. The issue involved in this case has adequately

been answered and thus the petitioners too deserve to get the

same treatment as has been given in the case of Dr. Paritosh

(Uploaded on 02/04/2026 at 04:10:47 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:15153] (6 of 6) [CW-7479/2026]

Ujjwal (supra). Hence, I am of the view that the controversy

involved in the case referred supra and the case in hand is the

same and there are no distinguishable features so as to dis entitle

the petitioners to get the same benefit as has been given to the

petitioners in the case of Dr. Paritosh Ujjwal (supra) in the same

terms and conditions and fashion.

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

the present writ petition is allowed.

5. The respondents are directed to verify the documents of

each petitioner and compute the services of the petitioner from

the date of their initial appointment on temporary/ad-hoc/urgent

basis. Upon such verification, if the respondents are satisfied

about the genuineness of the documents and the eligibility of the

petitioners, the benefit of continuity of services for all purposes

shall be granted to them. Appropriate orders be passed within a

period of eight weeks from now.